TY - JOUR
T1 - Transcranial electrical stimulation nomenclature
AU - Bikson, Marom
AU - Esmaeilpour, Zeinab
AU - Adair, Devin
AU - Kronberg, Greg
AU - Tyler, William J.
AU - Antal, Andrea
AU - Datta, Abhishek
AU - Sabel, Bernhard A.
AU - Nitsche, Michael A.
AU - Loo, Colleen
AU - Edwards, Dylan
AU - Ekhtiari, Hamed
AU - Knotkova, Helena
AU - Woods, Adam J.
AU - Hampstead, Benjamin M.
AU - Badran, Bashar W.
AU - Peterchev, Angel V.
N1 - Funding Information:
The contributions of A. V. Peterchev were supported by the NIH under grants R01MH091083 , R21MH106772 , and R01MH111889 . The contributions of A. J. Woods were supported by the NIH under grants R01AG054077 , K01AG050707 , and R21MH112206 . The contributions of M. Bikson were supported by the NIH under grants MH111896 , NS101362 , U54CA137788/U54CA132378 , and NS054783 . The contributions of B. M. Hampstead were supported from the VA ( IRX001534 ) and NIA ( R01AG058724 ). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies.
Funding Information:
The contributions of A. V. Peterchev were supported by the NIH under grants R01MH091083, R21MH106772, and R01MH111889. The contributions of A. J. Woods were supported by the NIH under grants R01AG054077, K01AG050707, and R21MH112206. The contributions of M. Bikson were supported by the NIH under grants MH111896, NS101362, U54CA137788/U54CA132378, and NS054783. The contributions of B. M. Hampstead were supported from the VA (IRX001534) and NIA (R01AG058724). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the funding agencies.
Funding Information:
The City University of New York has inventions on tES with MB as inventor. MB has equity in Soterix Medical and serves on the scientific advisory boards of Boston Scientific and GlaxoSmithKline. AVP is inventor on patents and patent applications and has received research and travel support as well as patent royalties from Rogue Research, research and travel support, consulting fees, as well as equipment donation from Tal Medical/Neurex, research and patent application support from Magstim, as well as equipment loans from MagVenture, all related to technology for transcranial magnetic stimulation. CKL has received research equipment support from Soterix Medical, and honoraria and travel support from Mecta for teaching in an International ECT course. BWB is an inventor on tES patents and patent applications, has equity in Bodhi NeuroTech and serves as a consultant to eQuility. MAN is an advisor for Neuroelectrics. AA has received research equipment, honoraria and travel support from support from NeuroConn/NeuroCare. HK has received research equipment support from Soterix Medical Inc, as well as research support and a single-event travel support from Ybrain, Inc.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) aims to alter brain function non-invasively by applying current to electrodes on the scalp. Decades of research and technological advancement are associated with a growing diversity of tES methods and the associated nomenclature for describing these methods. Whether intended to produce a specific response so the brain can be studied or lead to a more enduring change in behavior (e.g. for treatment), the motivations for using tES have themselves influenced the evolution of nomenclature, leading to some scientific, clinical, and public confusion. This ambiguity arises from (i) the infinite parameter space available in designing tES methods of application and (ii) varied naming conventions based upon the intended effects and/or methods of application. Here, we compile a cohesive nomenclature for contemporary tES technologies that respects existing and historical norms, while incorporating insight and classifications based on state-of-the-art findings. We consolidate and clarify existing terminology conventions, but do not aim to create new nomenclature. The presented nomenclature aims to balance adopting broad definitions that encourage flexibility and innovation in research approaches, against classification specificity that minimizes ambiguity about protocols but can hinder progress. Constructive research around tES classification, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), should allow some variations in protocol but also distinguish from approaches that bear so little resemblance that their safety and efficacy should not be compared directly. The proposed framework includes terms in contemporary use across peer-reviewed publications, including relatively new nomenclature introduced in the past decade, such as transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) and transcranial pulsed current stimulation (tPCS), as well as terms with long historical use such as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). We also define commonly used terms-of-the-trade including electrode, lead, anode, and cathode, whose prior use, in varied contexts, can also be a source of confusion. This comprehensive clarification of nomenclature and associated preliminary proposals for standardized terminology can support the development of consensus on efficacy, safety, and regulatory standards.
AB - Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) aims to alter brain function non-invasively by applying current to electrodes on the scalp. Decades of research and technological advancement are associated with a growing diversity of tES methods and the associated nomenclature for describing these methods. Whether intended to produce a specific response so the brain can be studied or lead to a more enduring change in behavior (e.g. for treatment), the motivations for using tES have themselves influenced the evolution of nomenclature, leading to some scientific, clinical, and public confusion. This ambiguity arises from (i) the infinite parameter space available in designing tES methods of application and (ii) varied naming conventions based upon the intended effects and/or methods of application. Here, we compile a cohesive nomenclature for contemporary tES technologies that respects existing and historical norms, while incorporating insight and classifications based on state-of-the-art findings. We consolidate and clarify existing terminology conventions, but do not aim to create new nomenclature. The presented nomenclature aims to balance adopting broad definitions that encourage flexibility and innovation in research approaches, against classification specificity that minimizes ambiguity about protocols but can hinder progress. Constructive research around tES classification, such as transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), should allow some variations in protocol but also distinguish from approaches that bear so little resemblance that their safety and efficacy should not be compared directly. The proposed framework includes terms in contemporary use across peer-reviewed publications, including relatively new nomenclature introduced in the past decade, such as transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) and transcranial pulsed current stimulation (tPCS), as well as terms with long historical use such as electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). We also define commonly used terms-of-the-trade including electrode, lead, anode, and cathode, whose prior use, in varied contexts, can also be a source of confusion. This comprehensive clarification of nomenclature and associated preliminary proposals for standardized terminology can support the development of consensus on efficacy, safety, and regulatory standards.
KW - Brain stimulation
KW - Classification
KW - Nomenclature
KW - Terminology
KW - Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES)
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85069660727&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85069660727&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.brs.2019.07.010
DO - 10.1016/j.brs.2019.07.010
M3 - Review article
C2 - 31358456
AN - SCOPUS:85069660727
SN - 1935-861X
VL - 12
SP - 1349
EP - 1366
JO - Brain Stimulation
JF - Brain Stimulation
IS - 6
ER -