Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Towards tDCS Digital Twins using Deep Learning-based Direct Estimation of Personalized Electrical Field Maps from T1-Weighted MRI.

Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention·2026
Same author

Short-term outcome of veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in patients of acute respiratory distress syndrome presenting at a tertiary care centre - An observational study.

Lung India : official organ of Indian Chest Society·2026
Same author

Recent Advancements of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Machine Learning: Methods, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Transactions on artificial intelligence·2026
Same author

Biomarkers.

Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association·2025
Same author

Which Score Works Better? Comparing Respiratory Extra-Corporeal Membrane Oxygenation Survival Prediction and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II in Predicting Mortality for Veno-venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Patients.

Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine·2025
Same author

Analysis of kidney and liver exchange transplantation in India (2000-2025): a multicentre, retrospective cohort study.

The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia·2025

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Mar 6, 2026

Neuronavigated Focalized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Administered During Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
09:33

Neuronavigated Focalized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Administered During Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Published on: November 15, 2024

2.2K

Projected current density comparison in tDCS block and smooth FE modeling.

Aprinda Indahlastari, Munish Chauhan, Rosalind J Sadleir

    Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference
    |March 9, 2017
    PubMed
    Summary

    The block model pipeline offers a faster and more independent approach for simulating transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) compared to the smooth model, with minimal differences in current density distribution.

    More Related Videos

    Technique and Considerations in the Use of 4x1 Ring High-definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation HD-tDCS
    15:05

    Technique and Considerations in the Use of 4x1 Ring High-definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation HD-tDCS

    Published on: July 14, 2013

    38.6K
    Targeting Neuronal Fiber Tracts for Deep Brain Stimulation Therapy Using Interactive, Patient-Specific Models
    14:14

    Targeting Neuronal Fiber Tracts for Deep Brain Stimulation Therapy Using Interactive, Patient-Specific Models

    Published on: August 12, 2018

    9.4K

    Related Experiment Videos

    Last Updated: Mar 6, 2026

    Neuronavigated Focalized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Administered During Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
    09:33

    Neuronavigated Focalized Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Administered During Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging

    Published on: November 15, 2024

    2.2K
    Technique and Considerations in the Use of 4x1 Ring High-definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation HD-tDCS
    15:05

    Technique and Considerations in the Use of 4x1 Ring High-definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation HD-tDCS

    Published on: July 14, 2013

    38.6K
    Targeting Neuronal Fiber Tracts for Deep Brain Stimulation Therapy Using Interactive, Patient-Specific Models
    14:14

    Targeting Neuronal Fiber Tracts for Deep Brain Stimulation Therapy Using Interactive, Patient-Specific Models

    Published on: August 12, 2018

    9.4K

    Area of Science:

    • Neuroscience
    • Biomedical Engineering
    • Computational Modeling

    Background:

    • Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) is a non-invasive brain stimulation technique.
    • Accurate computational modeling of tDCS is crucial for predicting current flow and optimizing stimulation protocols.
    • Different modeling approaches, such as block and smooth models, can influence simulation outcomes.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To compare current density distribution and projected current density calculations between block and smooth modeling pipelines for tDCS.
    • To evaluate the impact of smoothing levels on current density in specific brain regions.
    • To determine the relative accuracy and efficiency of each modeling approach.

    Main Methods:

    • Two modeling pipelines were developed: a block model (voxel-based, simulated in C) and smooth models (smoothed using Gaussian filters, simulated in COMSOL).
    • Three smoothing levels were applied to the smooth models.
    • Median current density differences were calculated in key brain areas (ASTG, HIP, IFG, OCC, PRC) for standard electrode montages (F3-RS, T7-T8, Cz-Oz).
    • Relative L2 error was computed for projected current density.

    Main Results:

    • Maximum median current density differences between pipelines reached +20% for specific montages, but within target brain structures, differences were within +7%.
    • Higher smoothing levels increased current density differences in T7-T8 and Cz-Oz montages.
    • No clear relationship was found between smoothing levels and current density in five cortical structures.
    • Relative L2 error was 17% for the block model and 21% for the smooth model.

    Conclusions:

    • The block model pipeline is a potentially more attractive alternative for tDCS simulations due to shorter modeling time and independence from commercial software.
    • While smoothing affects current density, the block model provides comparable results with greater efficiency.
    • Further research can optimize block model parameters for enhanced tDCS simulation accuracy.