Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
642
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
642 results for “Transcranial direct current stimulation”
EEG study of the attentional blink; before, during, and after transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Improving causality perception judgments in schizophrenia spectrum disorder via transcranial direct current stimulation - Dataset
<p>Raw data related to the publication:</p> <p>Schülke, R., Schmitter, C. V., & Straube, B. (2023). Improving causality perception judgments in schizophrenia spectrum disorder via transcranial direct current stimulation. <em>Journal of Psychiatry and Neuroscience</em>, <em>48</em>(4), E245–E254. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.220184">https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.220184</a></p> <p>Variables:</p> <ul> <li>Subject</li> <li>Condition – Stimulation condition; parietal (left parietal cathodal, right parietal anodal [LPC-RPA]), frontoparietal (left frontal cathodal, right parietal anodal [LFC-­RPA]), frontal (left frontal cathodal, right frontal anodal [LFC­-RFA])</li> <li>Timepoint – Before/After (stimulation)</li> <li>Angle – in degrees</li> <li>Angle_scaled – mean-centered and scaled Angle</li> <li>Delay_ms – in milliseconds</li> <li>Delay_ms_scaled – mean-centered and scaled Delayed_ms</li> <li>Causality – causal/non-causal (judgment)</li> <li>RT – reaction time in milliseconds</li> </ul> <p>In the original version of the data, the data had been incorrectly labelled: The data actually corresponding to the LFC-RPA condition had been incorrectly labelled as LPC-RPA, and the data actually corresponding to the LPC-RPA condition had been incorrectly labelled as LFC-RPA. This has been corrected with the 04/2024 version of the dataset.</p>
Datasets for "Placebo effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor skill acquisition"
<p>The following two .csv files contain the participant level data for the primary analyses conducted within the research study:</p> <p>"Placebo effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on motor skill acquisition"</p> <p>Data are formatted in long format for ease of analysis</p> <p>Dataset used in first analysis - Estimation of TDCS effect and Placebo effect including a NO TDCS control group</p> <p>ALLGROUPS.csv</p> <p>subid = Participant specific identifier<br> Age = Participant age in years<br> Sex = Participant sex (M/F)<br> RASex = Sex of research assistant that conducted the study for the participant<br> TrialNum = Trial number for the reaching task<br> Performance = Total trial time of the trial in seconds<br> AssignGrp = Group participant was assigned: Active = Active TDCS, Sham = Sham TDCS, Ctrl = No TDCS</p> <p>Dataset used in second analysis - Estimation of expectancy effects on Performance among TDCS groups ONLY</p> <p>TDCSGroupsONLY.csv</p> <p>subid = Participant specific identifier<br> Age = Participant age in years<br> Sex = Participant sex (M/F)<br> RASex = Sex of research assistant that conducted the study for the participant<br> TrialNum = Trial number for the reaching task<br> Performance = Total trial time of the trial in seconds<br> AssignGrp = Group participant was assigned: Active = Active TDCS, Sham = Sham TDCS, Ctrl = No TDCS<br> PostExp = Expectancy score post practice<br> PreExp = Expectancy score pre practice<br> Suggestibility = Suggestibility score<br> Prior Know = Prior knowledge of TDCS (Yes/No)<br> Prior Study = Participation in a study using TDCS (Yes/No)</p>
Raw data for "Examining the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on human episodic memory with machine learning"
<p>This is the raw dataset for "Examining the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on human episodic memory with machine learning". Each .xlsx file represents an experimental results of a single participant.</p> <p>Directory description:</p> <p>Eng_sham - the results from experiments without stimulation on English sample from Medvedeva, 2019.</p> <p>Eng_vlPFC - the results from experiments with vLPFC stimulation on English sample from Medvedeva, 2019.</p> <p>enc_off_new - the results from experiments with dLPFC offline encoding stimulation on Russian sample.</p> <p>enc_on_new - the results from experiments with dLPFC online encoding stimulation on Russian sample.</p> <p>sham_no stimulation - the results from experiments without stimulation offline encoding stimulation on Russian sample.</p> <p>vlPFC_stimulation - the results from experiments with vLPFC stimulation on Russian sample.</p> <p>Age.xlsx - the ages of the participants</p> <p> </p>
The impact of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on sensorimotor and inter-sensory temporal recalibration
<p>Data related to the study "The impact of cerebellar transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on sensorimotor and inter-sensory temporal recalibration".</p>
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) over the left prefrontal cortex does not affect time-trial self-paced cycling performance: Evidence from oscillatory brain activity and power output.
<p>This research will shed new light into the bidirectional relationship between acute aerobic exercise, brain and cognition. This is based on the particular role of executive (cognitive) function during exercise. The rationale of our study is that stimulation of the prefrontal cortex that has been repeatedly associated with executive function, would facilitate or impair self-paced aerobic exercise. This would also affect cognitive performance immediately after exercise. We will use a modified flanker’s task as a form of assessing executive function (see below for further details). The flanker’s task implies two different stimuli, one congruent and one incongruent. Relative to “congruent” stimuli, these “incongruent” stimuli are usually accompanied by increased response times (RTs) and decreased accuracy. To stimulate the prefrontal cortex, we use transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS). tDCS is able to induce cortical changes by hyperpolarizing (anodal) or depolarizing (cathodal) neuron’s resting membrane potential.<br> Therefore, the hypotheses of this research are:<br> 1) Anodal stimulation (relative to sham and cathodal stimulation) will improve self-paced aerobic exercise and, consequently it will also improve subsequent cognitive performance.<br> 2) Cathodal stimulation (relative to sham and anodal stimulation) will impair self-paced aerobic exercise and subsequent cognitive performance.<br> </p>
Targeted High-definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS) for Reducing Post-stroke Movement Impairments
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT05174949. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Action-Outcome Monitoring in Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder
<p>Data set of the publication: Straube, B., van Kemenade, B.M., Kircher, T. & Schülke, R. (2020). Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Improves Action-Outcome Monitoring in Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorder. <em>Brain Communications.</em> doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcaa151</p> <p><strong>Abstract</strong></p> <p><strong>Background:</strong> Patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder (SSD) often demonstrate impairments in action-outcome monitoring. Passivity phenomena and hallucinations, in particular, have been related to impairments of efference copy-based predictions which are relevant for the monitoring of outcomes produced by voluntary action. Frontal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been shown to improve action-outcome monitoring in healthy subjects. However, whether tDCS can improve action monitoring in patients with SSD remains unknown.</p> <p><strong>Objective:</strong> We investigated whether tDCS can improve the detection of temporal action-outcome discrepancies in patients with SSD.</p> <p><strong>Methods:</strong> On 4 separate days, we applied sham or left cathodal/right anodal tDCS in a randomised order to frontal (F3/F4), parietal (CP3/CP4) and frontoparietal (F3/CP4) areas of 19 patients with SSD and 26 healthy control (HC) subjects. Action-outcome monitoring was assessed subsequent to 10 min of sham/tDCS (1.5 mA). After a self-generated (active) or externally generated (passive) key press, subjects were presented with a visual outcome (a dot on the screen), which was presented after various delays (0–417 ms). Participants had to detect delays between the key press and the visual consequence. Symptom subgroups were explored based on the presence or absence of symptoms related to a paranoid-hallucinatory syndrome (SSD phs+/phs-).</p> <p><strong>Results:</strong> In general, delay-detection performance was impaired in the SSD compared to the HC group. Interaction analyses showed group-specific (SSD vs HC) and symptom-specific (SSD phs+ vs SSD phs-) tDCS effects. Post-hoc tests revealed that frontal tDCS improved the detection of long delays in active conditions and reduced the proportion of false alarms in undelayed trials of the passive condition in patients. The SSD phs- group benefited especially from frontal tDCS in active conditions, while improvement in the SSD phs+ group was predominantly reflected in reduced false alarm rates in passive conditions.</p> <p><strong>Conclusion:</strong> These data provide some first evidence for the potential utility of tDCS in improving efference copy mechanisms and action-outcome monitoring in SSD. Current data indicate that improving efference copy-related processes can be especially effective in patients with no or few positive symptoms, while intersensory matching (i.e. task-relevant in passive conditions) could be more susceptible to improvement in patients with paranoid-hallucinatory symptoms.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Keywords:</strong> transcranial direct current stimulation; action-perception; action feedback; delay detection; schizophrenia.</p> <p> </p>
Modulating the assessment of semantic speech–gesture relatedness via transcranial direct current stimulation of the left frontal cortex
<p>Raw data related to the publication:</p> <p>Schülke, R., & <strong>Straube, B.</strong> (accepted). Modulating the assessment of semantic speech-gesture relatedness via transcranial direct current stimulation of the left frontal cortex. Brain Stimulation. DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2016.10.012.</p> <p> </p> <p>Statistical software: SPSS</p> <p>Variables:</p> <p>Subject<br> Stimulus<br> SessionNr<br> Stimulation<br> Localisation - frontal/parietal/frontoparietal<br> Polarisation - anode left/right<br> Relatedness - related/unrelated<br> Gesture_type - iconic/metaphoric<br> Reaction_time - in milliseconds<br> Rating - on a scale from 1-7</p>
Hemispheric diferences in the processing of visual consequences of active vs. passive movements: a transcranial direct current stimulation study
<p>Dataset related to the following publication:</p> <p>Straube, B., Schülke, R., Drewing, K., Kircher, T., van Kemenade, B.M. (2017). Hemispheric differences in the processing of visual consequences of active vs. passive movements: a transcranial direct current stimulation study. Exp. Brain Res. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-017-5053-x</p>
Reduced isometric knee extensor force following anodal transcranial direct current stimulation of the ipsilateral motor cortex
<p>Background: The goal of this study was to determine if 10-min of anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (a-tDCS) to the motor cortex (M1) is capable of modulating quadriceps isometric maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force or fatigue endurance contralateral or ipsilateral to the stimulation site.</p> <p>Results: The main finding of this study was a significant interaction effect for stimulation condition x leg tested x time [F(1,60) =7.156, p = 0.010, ηp2 = 0.11] which revealed significant absolute KE MVC force impairments in the contralateral leg following s-tDCS (p < 0.001, d =1.2) and in the ipsilateral leg following a-tDCS (p < 0.001, d = 1.09). A significant interaction effect for condition x leg tested [F(1,56) = 8.12, p = 0.006, ηp2 = 0.13], showed a significantly lower left quadriceps (ipsilateral to tDCS) relative MVC force with a-tDCS, versus s-tDCS [t(15) = -3.07, p = 0.016, d = -0.77]. There was no significant difference between the relative right quadriceps (contralateral to tDCS) MVC force for a-tDCS and s-tDCS. Although, there was an overall significant [F(1,56) = 8.36, p < 0.001] 12.1% force decrease between the first and twelfth MVC repetitions, there were no significant main or interaction effects for fatigue index force.</p> <p>Conclusion: Hence, a-tDCS may be ineffective at increasing maximal force or endurance and instead may be detrimental to quadriceps force production.</p>
The Effect of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation on Motor Performance in Healthy Adults
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04577768. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Cerebellar Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation and Aphasia Treatment
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02901574. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
ADHD Electrophysiological Subtypes and Implications in Transcranial Direct-current Stimulation
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01649232. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 4.
Self-Administered Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Pain in Older Adults With Knee Osteoarthritis
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT04016272. IPD Sharing: NO. Countries: 1. Publications: 3.
The Effectiveness of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in Decreasing Food Cravings
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01030289. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) As A Treatment For Cigarette Craving and Cognitive Deficits in Schizophrenic
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT02128919. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Cognitive Remediation Augmented With Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03049969. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Fostering Eating After Stroke With Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT01919112. IPD Sharing: Not stated. Countries: 1. Publications: 1.
Computer Training and Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation for Cognition in HIV
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03440840. IPD Sharing: YES. Countries: 1. Publications: 2.
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.