Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 2, 2026
08:50
Brain State-dependent Brain Stimulation with Real-time Electroencephalography-Triggered Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation
Published on: August 20, 2019
17.3K
Inter-individual variability in response to non-invasive brain stimulation paradigms
Virginia López-Alonso1, Binith Cheeran2, Dan Río-Rodríguez1
1Faculty of Sciences of Sport and Physical Education, Department of Physical Education, University of A Coruña, Av. Ernesto Che Guevara 121, Pazos-Liáns, 15179 Oleiros, A Coruña, Spain.
Brain Stimulation
|March 18, 2014
Summary
Non-invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) shows high variability in effectiveness. A bimodal response pattern was observed, indicating that many individuals do not respond as expected to stimulation protocols.
Area of Science:
- Neuroscience
- Neurophysiology
- Brain Stimulation
Background:
- Non-invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) offers safe modulation of cortical plasticity for research and therapy.
- Significant concerns exist regarding the inconsistent efficacy and reliability of NIBS across individuals.
Purpose of the Study:
- To investigate if a multimodal distribution better explains inter-individual variability in NIBS responses.
- To identify distinct response patterns to different NIBS protocols using cluster analysis.
Main Methods:
- Studied Paired Associative Stimulation (PAS25), Anodal transcranial DC stimulation (AtDCS), and intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS) in 56 subjects over three sessions.
- Employed cluster analysis to identify response patterns and assessed predictive value of baseline TMS measures (SICI, RMT) and time of day.
Main Results:
- No significant differences in efficacy were found among PAS25, AtDCS, and iTBS within the first hour post-stimulation for the overall sample.
- Cluster analysis revealed a bimodal response, with only 39-45% of subjects responding as anticipated to the tested NIBS protocols.
- Pre-stimulation short intracortical inhibition (SICI) predicted response to PAS25, but other baseline measures and time of day did not predict responses.
Conclusions:
- A high rate of 'dose-failure' was observed across multiple NIBS paradigms, highlighting significant inter-individual variability.
- Addressing this variability is crucial for the successful experimental and therapeutic application of NIBS.
- Findings have implications for sample size calculations and the benefits of sample enrichment in NIBS research.
