Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on response inhibition.

Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation / methods Humans Inhibition, Psychological Reaction Time / physiology
Coefficient of variation ratio Inter-individual differences Response inhibition Transcranial direct current stimulation

Journal

Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 08 2024
Historique:
received: 27 06 2024
accepted: 12 08 2024
medline: 20 8 2024
pubmed: 20 8 2024
entrez: 19 8 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Deficiencies in response inhibition are associated with numerous mental health conditions, warranting innovative treatments. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, modulates cortical excitability and has shown promise in improving response inhibition. However, tDCS effects on response inhibition often yield contradictory findings. Previous research emphasized the importance of inter-individual factors that are mostly ignored in conventional meta-analyses of mean effects. We aimed to fill this gap and promote the complementary use of the coefficient of variation ratio and standardized mean effects. The systematic literature search included single-session and sham-controlled tDCS studies utilizing stop-signal task or Go-NoGo tasks, analyzing 88 effect sizes from 53 studies. Considering the impact of inter-individual factors, we hypothesized that variances increase in the active versus sham tDCS. However, the results showed that variances between both groups did not differ. Additionally, analyzing standardized mean effects supported previous research showing an improvement in the stop-signal task but not in the Go-NoGo task following active tDCS. These findings suggest that inter-individual differences do not increase variances in response inhibition, implying that the heterogeneity cannot be attributed to higher variance in response inhibition during and after active tDCS. Furthermore, methodological considerations are crucial for tDCS efficacy.

Identifiants

DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-70065-7 PMID: 39160262
pubmed: 39160262
doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-70065-7
pii: 10.1038/s41598-024-70065-7
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

19197

Subventions

Organisme : Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
ID : 269953372/GRK2150
Organisme : START-Program of the Faculty of Medicine of the RWTH Aachen University
ID : 06/22

Informations de copyright

© 2024. The Author(s).

Références

Xu, P., Wu, D., Chen, Y., Wang, Z. & Xiao, W. The effect of response inhibition training on risky decision-making task performance. Front. Psychol. 11, 1806 (2020).
pubmed: 32793080 pmcid: 7393991 doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01806
Liu, W., Peeters, N., Fernández, G. & Kohn, N. Common neural and transcriptional correlates of inhibitory control underlie emotion regulation and memory control. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 15, 523–536 (2020).
pubmed: 32507888 pmcid: 7328031 doi: 10.1093/scan/nsaa073
Dillon, D. G. & Pizzagalli, D. A. Inhibition of action, thought, and emotion: A selective neurobiological review. Appl. Prev. Psychol. 12, 99–114 (2007).
pubmed: 19050749 pmcid: 2396584 doi: 10.1016/j.appsy.2007.09.004
Verbruggen, F. et al. A consensus guide to capturing the ability to inhibit actions and impulsive behaviors in the stop-signal task. eLife 8, e46323 (2019).
pubmed: 31033438 pmcid: 6533084 doi: 10.7554/eLife.46323
Abramovitch, A. & Cooperman, A. The cognitive neuropsychology of obsessive-compulsive disorder: A critical review. J. Obsessive-Compuls. Relat. Disord. 5, 24–36 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.jocrd.2015.01.002
Gillespie, S. M., Lee, J., Williams, R. & Jones, A. Psychopathy and response inhibition: A meta-analysis of go/no-go and stop signal task performance. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 142, 104868 (2022).
pubmed: 36113781 doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2022.104868
Moeller, F. G., Barratt, E. S., Dougherty, D. M., Schmitz, J. M. & Swann, A. C. Psychiatric aspects of impulsivity. Am. J. Psychiatry 158, 1783–1793 (2001).
pubmed: 11691682 doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.158.11.1783
Senkowski, D. et al. Assessing inhibitory control deficits in adult ADHD: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the stop-signal task. medRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.07.09.22277429 (2022).
doi: 10.1101/2022.07.09.22277429
Smith, J. L., Mattick, R. P., Jamadar, S. D. & Iredale, J. M. Deficits in behavioural inhibition in substance abuse and addiction: A meta-analysis. Drug Alcohol Depend. 145, 1–33 (2014).
pubmed: 25195081 doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2014.08.009
Wu, M., Hartmann, M., Skunde, M., Herzog, W. & Friederich, H. C. Inhibitory control in bulimic-type eating disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 8, e83412 (2013).
pubmed: 24391763 pmcid: 3877018 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083412
Gavazzi, G. et al. Subregional prefrontal cortex recruitment as a function of inhibitory demand: An fMRI metanalysis. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105285 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2023.105285 pubmed: 37327836
Hajek, T., Alda, M., Hajek, E. & Ivanoff, J. Functional neuroanatomy of response inhibition in bipolar disorders—Combined voxel based and cognitive performance meta-analysis. J. Psychiatr. Res. 47, 1955–1966 (2013).
pubmed: 24070910 doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2013.08.015
Nitsche, M. A. et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation: State of the art 2008. Brain Stimul. 1, 206–223 (2008).
pubmed: 20633386 doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2008.06.004
Jacobson, L., Koslowsky, M. & Lavidor, M. tDCS polarity effects in motor and cognitive domains: A meta-analytical review. Exp. Brain Res. 216, 1–10 (2012).
pubmed: 21989847 doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2891-9
Friehs, M., Frings, C. & Hartwigsen, G. Effects of single-session transcranial direct current stimulation on reactive response inhibition. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 128, 749–765 (2021).
pubmed: 34271027 doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.07.013
Rezvanian, S., Saraei, M., Mohajeri, H. & Hassani-Abharian, P. The effect of different transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) protocols on drug craving and cognitive functions in methamphetamine addicts. BASIC Clin. Neurosci. 13, 349–356 (2022).
pubmed: 36457875 pmcid: 9706295 doi: 10.32598/bcn.2021.1929.1
Dambacher, F. et al. No effects of bilateral tDCS over inferior frontal gyrus on response inhibition and aggression. PLoS ONE 10, e0132170 (2015).
pubmed: 26161664 pmcid: 4498781 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132170
Schroeder, P. A., Seewald, A. & Svaldi, J. Spotlight on the left frontal cortex: No evidence for response inhibition from cathodal high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation over left inferior frontal gyrus or left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 34, 1090–1102 (2022).
pubmed: 35303094 doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01849
Narmashiri, A. & Akbari, F. The effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on the cognitive functions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychol. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-023-09627-x (2023).
doi: 10.1007/s11065-023-09627-x pubmed: 38060075
Schroeder, P., Schwippel, T., Wolz, I. & Svaldi, J. Meta-analysis of the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on inhibitory control. Brain Stimul. 13, 1159–1167 (2020).
pubmed: 32442624 doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2020.05.006
Vergallito, A., Feroldi, S., Pisoni, A. & Romero Lauro, L. J. Inter-individual variability in tDCS effects: A narrative review on the contribution of stable, variable, and contextual factors. Brain Sci. 12, 522 (2022).
pubmed: 35624908 pmcid: 9139102 doi: 10.3390/brainsci12050522
Plewnia, C. et al. Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on executive functions: Influence of COMT Val/Met polymorphism. Cortex 49, 1801–1807 (2013).
pubmed: 23237479 doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.11.002
Weidler, C. et al. The influence of the COMT Val158Met polymorphism on prefrontal TDCS effects on aggression. Sci. Rep. 14, 3437 (2024).
pubmed: 38341445 pmcid: 10858895 doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-53930-3
Wiegand, A., Nieratschker, V. & Plewnia, C. Genetic modulation of transcranial direct current stimulation effects on cognition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2016.00651 (2016).
doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00651 pubmed: 28066217 pmcid: 5177633
Opitz, A., Paulus, W., Will, S., Antunes, A. & Thielscher, A. Determinants of the electric field during transcranial direct current stimulation. Neuroimage 109, 140–150 (2015).
pubmed: 25613437 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.01.033
Fehring, D. et al. Investigating the sex-dependent effects of prefrontal cortex stimulation on response execution and inhibition. Biol. Sex Differ. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13293-021-00390-3 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s13293-021-00390-3 pubmed: 34404467 pmcid: 8369781
McCann, H. & Beltrachini, L. Does participant’s age impact on tDCS induced fields? Insights from computational simulations. Biomed. Phys. Eng. Express 7, 045018 (2021).
doi: 10.1088/2057-1976/ac0547
Filmer, H. L., Ehrhardt, S. E., Shaw, T. B., Mattingley, J. B. & Dux, P. E. The efficacy of transcranial direct current stimulation to prefrontal areas is related to underlying cortical morphology. Neuroimage 196, 41–48 (2019).
pubmed: 30978491 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.04.026
Razza, L. B. et al. Investigating the variability of prefrontal tDCS effects on working memory: An individual E-field distribution study. Cortex 172, 38–48 (2024).
pubmed: 38157837 doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2023.10.025
Dedoncker, J., Brunoni, A. R., Baeken, C. & Vanderhasselt, M.-A. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in healthy and neuropsychiatric samples: Influence of stimulation parameters. Brain Stimul. 9, 501–517 (2016).
pubmed: 27160468 doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.04.006
Mizutani-Tiebel, Y. et al. Differences in electric field strength between clinical and non-clinical populations induced by prefrontal tDCS: A cross-diagnostic, individual MRI-based modeling study. NeuroImage Clin. 34, 103011 (2022).
pubmed: 35487132 pmcid: 9125784 doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2022.103011
Batsikadze, G., Paulus, W., Grundey, J., Kuo, M.-F. & Nitsche, M. A. Effect of the nicotinic α4β2-receptor partial agonist varenicline on non-invasive brain stimulation-induced neuroplasticity in the human motor cortex. Cereb. Cortex 25, 3249–3259 (2015).
pubmed: 24917274 doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhu126
Weidler, C. et al. Consequences of prefrontal tDCS on inhibitory control and reactive aggression. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 17, 120–130 (2022).
pubmed: 33227131 doi: 10.1093/scan/nsaa158
Grundey, J. et al. Nicotine modulates human brain plasticity via calcium-dependent mechanisms. J. Physiol. 596, 5429–5441 (2018).
pubmed: 30218585 pmcid: 6235936 doi: 10.1113/JP276502
Nakagawa, S. et al. Meta-analysis of variation: Ecological and evolutionary applications and beyond. Methods Ecol. Evol. 6, 143–152 (2015).
doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12309
Homan, S. et al. Treatment effect variability in brain stimulation across psychiatric disorders: A meta-analysis of variance. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 124, 54–62 (2021).
pubmed: 33482243 doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.11.033
Bell, S. B. & DeWall, N. Does transcranial direct current stimulation to the prefrontal cortex affect social behavior? A meta-analysis. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 13, 899–906 (2018).
pubmed: 30137565 pmcid: 6137315 doi: 10.1093/scan/nsy069
Senior, A. M., Gosby, A. K., Lu, J., Simpson, S. J. & Raubenheimer, D. Meta-analysis of variance: An illustration comparing the effects of two dietary interventions on variability in weight. Evol. Med. Public Health 2016, 244–255 (2016).
pubmed: 27491895 pmcid: 4981479 doi: 10.1093/emph/eow020
Brugger, S. P. & Howes, O. D. Heterogeneity and homogeneity of regional brain structure in schizophrenia: A meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry 74, 1104–1111 (2017).
pubmed: 28973084 pmcid: 5669456 doi: 10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2017.2663
Sterne, J. A. C. et al. RoB 2: A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ 366, l4898 (2019).
pubmed: 31462531 doi: 10.1136/bmj.l4898
Monte-Silva, K. et al. Induction of late LTP-like plasticity in the human motor cortex by repeated non-invasive brain stimulation. Brain Stimul. 6, 424–432 (2013).
pubmed: 22695026 doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2012.04.011
Batsikadze, G., Moliadze, V., Paulus, W., Kuo, M. & Nitsche, M. Partially non-linear stimulation intensity-dependent effects of direct current stimulation on motor cortex excitability in humans. J. Physiol. 591, 1987–2000 (2013).
pubmed: 23339180 pmcid: 3624864 doi: 10.1113/jphysiol.2012.249730
Wynn, S. C., Driessen, J. M. A., Glennon, J. C., Brazil, I. A. & Schutter, D. J. L. G. Cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation improves reactive response inhibition in healthy volunteers. Cerebellum Lond. Engl. 18, 983–988 (2019).
doi: 10.1007/s12311-019-01047-z
Ostrowski, J., Svaldi, J. & Schroeder, P. A. More focal, less heterogeneous? Multi-level meta-analysis of cathodal high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation effects on language and cognition. J. Neural Transm. 129, 861–878 (2022).
pubmed: 35585206 doi: 10.1007/s00702-022-02507-3
Gray, J. P., Müller, V. I., Eickhoff, S. B. & Fox, P. T. Multimodal abnormalities of brain structure and function in major depressive disorder: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Am. J. Psychiatry 177, 422–434 (2020).
pubmed: 32098488 pmcid: 7294300 doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.19050560
Picó-Pérez, M. et al. Modality-specific overlaps in brain structure and function in obsessive-compulsive disorder: Multimodal meta-analysis of case-control MRI studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 112, 83–94 (2020).
pubmed: 32006553 doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.01.033
Cai, W., Ryali, S., Chen, T., Li, C.-S.R. & Menon, V. Dissociable roles of right inferior frontal cortex and anterior insula in inhibitory control: Evidence from intrinsic and task-related functional parcellation, connectivity, and response profile analyses across multiple datasets. J. Neurosci. 34, 14652–14667 (2014).
pubmed: 25355218 pmcid: 4212065 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3048-14.2014
Swick, D., Ashley, V. & Turken, U. Are the neural correlates of stopping and not going identical? Quantitative meta-analysis of two response inhibition tasks. Neuroimage 56, 1655–1665 (2011).
pubmed: 21376819 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.02.070
Raud, L., Westerhausen, R., Dooley, N. & Huster, R. J. Differences in unity: The go/no-go and stop signal tasks rely on different mechanisms. NeuroImage 210, 116582 (2020).
pubmed: 31987997 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116582
Simmonds, D. J., Pekar, J. J. & Mostofsky, S. H. Meta-analysis of Go/No-go tasks demonstrating that fMRI activation associated with response inhibition is task-dependent. Neuropsychologia 46, 224–232 (2008).
pubmed: 17850833 doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2007.07.015
Algermissen, J. & Mehler, D. M. May the power be with you: Are there highly powered studies in neuroscience, and how can we get more of them?. J. Neurophysiol. 119, 2114–2117 (2018).
pubmed: 29465324 doi: 10.1152/jn.00765.2017
Simmonds, M. Quantifying the risk of error when interpreting funnel plots. Syst. Rev. 4, 1–7 (2015).
doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0004-8
Kuhn, T. et al. The ENIGMA Neuromodulation Working Group: Goals, Challenges, and Opportunities for the Field. (2024).
Allen, C. & Mehler, D. M. Open science challenges, benefits and tips in early career and beyond. PLoS Biol. 17, e3000246 (2019).
pubmed: 31042704 pmcid: 6513108 doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000246
Page, M. J. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71 (2021).
doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71 pubmed: 33782057 pmcid: 8479591
Boggio, P. S. et al. Go-no-go task performance improvement after anodal transcranial DC stimulation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in major depression. J. Affect. Disord. 101, 91–98 (2007).
pubmed: 17166593 doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2006.10.026
Reinhart, R. M. & Woodman, G. F. Causal control of medial–frontal cortex governs electrophysiological and behavioral indices of performance monitoring and learning. J. Neurosci. 34, 4214–4227 (2014).
pubmed: 24647942 pmcid: 3960465 doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5421-13.2014
Stramaccia, D. F., Penolazzi, B., Altoè, G. & Galfano, G. TDCS over the right inferior frontal gyrus disrupts control of interference in memory: A retrieval-induced forgetting study. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 144, 114–130 (2017).
pubmed: 28709999 doi: 10.1016/j.nlm.2017.07.005
Rohatgi, A. WebPlotDigitizer: 4.6. (2022).
Chapter 23, Including Variants on Randomized Trials. (Wiley Blackwell, 2019).
Higgins, J., Sandra, E. & Tianjing, L. Chapter 23, Including variants on randomized trials (Second edition). (eds Higgins, J. et al.) (Wiley Blackwell, 2019). https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119536604.ch23 .
Senior, A. M., Viechtbauer, W. & Nakagawa, S. Revisiting and expanding the meta-analysis of variation: The log coefficient of variation ratio. Res. Synth. Methods 11, 553–567 (2020).
pubmed: 32431099 doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1423
Viechtbauer, W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Softw. 36, 1–48 (2010).
doi: 10.18637/jss.v036.i03

Auteurs

Luca Lasogga (L)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany. llasogga@ukaachen.de.
, Office 117, Wendlingweg 2, 52074, Aachen, Germany. llasogga@ukaachen.de.

Chiara Gramegna (C)

PhD Program in Neuroscience, School of Medicine and Surgery, University of Milano-Bicocca, Monza, Italy.

Dario Müller (D)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.

Ute Habel (U)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.
Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine, JARA-Institute Brain Structure Function Relationship (INM 10), Research Center Jülich, Wilhelm-Johnen-Straße, 52438, Jülich, Germany.

David M A Mehler (DMA)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.
Institute for Translational Psychiatry, University of Münster, 48149, Münster, Germany.
Cardiff University Brain Research Imaging Centre (CUBRIC), School of Psychology, Cardiff University, Cardiff, CF24 4HQ, UK.

Ruben C Gur (RC)

Brain Behavior Laboratories, Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, USA.

Carmen Weidler (C)

Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen, Pauwelsstraße 30, 52074, Aachen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female

Evaluation of Low-Value Services Across Major Medicare Advantage Insurers and Traditional Medicare.

Ciara Duggan, Adam L Beckman, Ishani Ganguli et al.
1.00
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C

Effectiveness of Virtual Yoga for Chronic Low Back Pain: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Hallie Tankha, Devyn Gaskins, Amanda Shallcross et al.
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH

questionsmedicales.fr › Disciplines et activités comportementales › Techniques psychologiques › Électrochoc › Stimulation transcrânienne par courant continu › Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on...
questionsmedicales.fr › Eucaryotes › Animaux › Chordés › Vertébrés › Mammifères › Eutheria › Primates › Haplorhini › Catarrhini › Hominidae › Humains › Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on...
questionsmedicales.fr › Phénomènes psychologiques › Théorie psychologique › Théorie psychanalytique › Inhibition (psychologie) › Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on...
questionsmedicales.fr › Phénomènes physiologiques de l'appareil locomoteur et du système nerveux › Phénomènes physiologiques du système nerveux › Temps de réaction › Meta-analysis of variance in tDCS effects on...