Electric field simulations of transcranial direct current stimulation in children with perinatal stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Perinatal stroke (PS) is a focal vascular brain injury and the leading cause of hemiparetic cerebral palsy. Motor impairments last a lifetime but treatments are limited. Transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) may enhance motor learning in adults but tDCS effects on motor learning are less studied in children. Imaging-based simulations of tDCS-induced electric fields (EF) suggest differences in the developing brain compared to adults but have not been applied to common pediatric disease states. We created estimates of tDCS-induced EF strength using five tDCS montages targeting the motor system in children with PS [arterial ischemic stroke (AIS) or periventricular infarction (PVI)] and typically developing controls (TDC) aged 6-19 years to explore associates between simulation values and underlying anatomy. Methods: Simulations were performed using SimNIBS https://simnibs.github.io/simnibs/build/html/index.html using T1, T2, and diffusion-weighted images. After tissue segmentation and tetrahedral mesh generation, tDCS-induced EF was estimated based on the finite element model (FEM). Five 1mA tDCS montages targeting motor function in the paretic (non-dominant) hand were simulated. Estimates of peak EF strength, EF angle, field focality, and mean EF in motor cortex (M1) were extracted for each montage and compared between groups. Results: Simulations for eighty-three children were successfully completed (21 AIS, 30 PVI, 32 TDC). Conventional tDCS montages utilizing anodes over lesioned cortex had higher peak EF strength values for the AIS group compared to TDC. These montages showed lower mean EF strength within target M1 regions suggesting that peaks were not necessarily localized to motor network-related targets. EF angle was lower for TDC compared to PS groups for a subset of montages. Montages using anodes over lesioned cortex were more sensitive to variations in underlying anatomy (lesion and tissue volumes) than those using cathodes over non-lesioned cortex. Discussion: Individualized patient-centered tDCS EF simulations are prudent for clinical trial planning and may provide insight into the efficacy of tDCS interventions in children with PS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".