MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413355409 · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhaf229

Generalized learning induced by training and tDCS is predicted by prefrontal cortical morphology

2025· article· en· W4413355409 on OpenAlexaff
Shane E. Ehrhardt, Yohan Wards, Thomas B. Shaw, Kelly Garner, Steffen Bollmann, Jason B. Mattingley, Paul E. Dux, Hannah L. Filmer

Bibliographic record

VenueCerebral Cortex · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilAustralian Research CouncilMotor Neurone Disease Research AustraliaAustralian Government
KeywordsTranscranial direct-current stimulationHuman multitaskingPrefrontal cortexStimulationCognitionPsychologyNeuroscienceBrain stimulationEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performanceNeuroplasticityCognitive trainingExecutive functionsWorking memoryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brain stimulation shows promise as an intervention to enhance executive function, particularly when paired with cognitive training. To optimize such approaches, we must understand the potential role of individual differences in intervention outcomes. We investigated the combined effects of multi-session multitasking training and prefrontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on generalization of performance benefits, focusing on how cortical morphology predicts performance improvements. One hundred seventy-eight individuals underwent 7 Tesla MRI before completing multisession training with online stimulation. A cognitive task battery assessed improvements in trained and untrained tasks pre- and post-training. Stimulating the left or right prefrontal cortex at 1 mA during multitasking training enhanced transfer to a visual search task. Critically, cortical morphology predicted stimulation efficacy for inducing transfer. Cortical thickness in regions beneath the stimulating anode was related to reaction time changes in the most difficult visual search condition but only for the left and right 1 mA multitasking training groups. Performance was not related to cortical thickness for the groups receiving sham stimulation, 2 mA stimulation, or 1 mA stimulation with a control training task. These results highlight the importance of individual anatomical differences in modulating tDCS efficacy and identifying specific neuroanatomical features that predict generalized performance gains from combining tDCS with cognitive training.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.887
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCerebral CortexSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207