↓ Skip to main content

Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation to the cerebellum improves handwriting and cyclic drawing kinematics in focal hand dystonia

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (55th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
78 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
149 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Anodal transcranial direct current stimulation to the cerebellum improves handwriting and cyclic drawing kinematics in focal hand dystonia
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00286
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lynley V. Bradnam, Lynton J. Graetz, Michelle N. McDonnell, Michael C. Ridding

Abstract

There is increasing evidence that the cerebellum has a role in the pathophysiology of primary focal hand dystonia and might provide an intervention target for non-invasive brain stimulation to improve function of the affected hand. The primary objective of this study was to determine if cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) improves handwriting and cyclic drawing kinematics in people with hand dystonia, by reducing cerebellar-brain inhibition (CBI) evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). Eight people with dystonia (5 writer's dystonia, 3 musician's dystonia) and eight age-matched controls completed the study and underwent cerebellar anodal, cathodal and sham tDCS in separate sessions. Dystonia severity was assessed using the Writer's Cramp Rating Scale (WRCS) and the Arm Dystonia Disability Scale (ADDS). The kinematic measures that differentiated the groups were; mean stroke frequency during handwriting and fast cyclic drawing and average pen pressure during light cyclic drawing. TMS measures of cortical excitability were no different between people with FHD and controls. There was a moderate, negative relationship between TMS-evoked CBI at baseline and the WRCS in dystonia. Anodal cerebellar tDCS reduced handwriting mean stroke frequency and average pen pressure, and increased speed and reduced pen pressure during fast cyclic drawing. Kinematic measures were not associated with a decrease in CBI within an individual. In conclusion, cerebellar anodal tDCS appeared to improve kinematics of handwriting and circle drawing tasks; but the underlying neurophysiological mechanism remains uncertain. A study in a larger homogeneous population is needed to further investigate the possible therapeutic benefit of cerebellar tDCS in dystonia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 149 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 147 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 28 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 18%
Student > Master 23 15%
Student > Bachelor 12 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 5%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 33 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 31 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 21 14%
Psychology 18 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 7 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 4%
Other 18 12%
Unknown 48 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 May 2015.
All research outputs
#12,804,964
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#3,589
of 7,145 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,451
of 265,520 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#94
of 186 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,145 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,520 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 186 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.