The Modulatory Effects of Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation on Brain Oscillatory Patterns in the Beta Band in Healthy Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In the last few years, transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) has attracted attention as a promising approach to interact with ongoing oscillatory cortical activity and, consequently, to enhance cognitive and motor processes. While tACS findings are limited by high variability in young adults’ responses, its effects on brain oscillations in older adults remain largely unexplored. In fact, the modulatory effects of tACS on cortical oscillations in healthy aging participants have not yet been investigated extensively, particularly during movement. This study aimed to examine the after-effects of 20 Hz and 70 Hz High-Definition tACS on beta oscillations both during rest and movement. Methods: We recorded resting state EEG signals and during a handgrip task in 15 healthy older participants. We applied 10 min of 20 Hz HD-tACS, 70 Hz HD-tACS or Sham stimulation for 10 min. We extracted resting-state beta power and movement-related beta desynchronization (MRBD) values to compare between stimulation frequencies and across time. Results: We found that 20 Hz HD-tACS induced a significant reduction in beta power for electrodes C3 and CP3, while 70 Hz did not have any significant effects. With regards to MRBD, 20 Hz HD-tACS led to more negative values, while 70 Hz HD-tACS resulted in more positive ones for electrodes C3 and FC3. Conclusions: These findings suggest that HD-tACS can modulate beta brain oscillations with frequency specificity. They also highlight the focal impact of HD-tACS, which elicits effects on the cortical region situated directly beneath the stimulation electrode.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".