Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

OBJECTIVES: Electric field modeling utilizes structural brain magnetic resonance images (MRI) to model the electric field induced by non-invasive transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in a given individual. Electric field modeling is being integrated with clinical outcomes to improve understanding of inter-individual variability in tDCS effects and to optimize tDCS parameters, thereby enhancing the predictability of clinical effects. The successful integration of modeling in clinical use will primarily be driven by choice of tools and procedures implemented in computational modeling. Thus, the electric field predictions from different modeling pipelines need to be investigated to ensure the validity and reproducibility of tDCS modeling results across clinical or translational studies. METHODS: We used T1w structural MRI from 32 healthy volunteer subjects and modeled the electric field distribution for a fronto-temporal tDCS montage. For five different computational modeling pipelines, we quantitatively compared brain tissue segmentation and electric field predicted in whole-brain, brain tissues and target brain regions between the modeling pipelines. RESULTS: Our comparisons at various levels did not reveal any systematic trend with regards to similarity or dissimilarity of electric field predicted in brain tissues and target brain regions. The inconsistent trends in the predicted electric field indicate variation in the procedures, routines and algorithms used within and across the modeling pipelines. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that studies integrating electric field modeling and clinical outcomes of tDCS will highly depend upon the choice of the modeling pipelines and procedures. We propose that using these pipelines for further research and clinical applications should be subject to careful consideration, and indicate general recommendations.

More information Original publication

DOI

10.1016/j.neucli.2021.05.002

Type

Journal article

Publication Date

2021-08-01T00:00:00+00:00

Volume

51

Pages

303 - 318

Total pages

15

Keywords

Computational modeling, Electric field modeling, Magnetic resonance imaging, Schizophrenia, Transcranial direct current stimulation, Brain, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Reproducibility of Results, Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation