ArticleeNeuro2026
Connectome-Guided Personalization of Optimal TDCS Intervention Selection in Alzheimer's Disease: A Modeling Study.
Article in eNeuro, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) could reduce the neurophysiological effects in Alzheimer's disease (AD), but progress is hampered by variable outcomes across studies, likely related to both methodological and individual differences. We recently described a virtual brain network simulation method for optimizing tDCS interventions and now propose a method for further personalizing this approach. We now personalized the model for six female and four male biomarker-confirmed AD patients based on their brain structure and functional connectivity by using individual structural magnetic resonance imaging data and amplitude envelope correlation-based connectivity matrices extracted from magnetoencephalography (MEG) scans, respectively. We then assessed a set of previously established stimulation strategies based on their ability to improve relevant neurophysiological outcome parameters in each personalized model while undergoing AD damage. Personalized tDCS strategies were able to delay neurophysiological deterioration, but while the general model favored posterior anodal stimulation targeting the precuneus region, the personalized models favored frontal anodal stimulation targeting the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex region in 90% of the cases. This may be explained by higher connectivity levels of frontal regions in the personalized connectivity matrices, as anodal stimulation of highly connected regions produced more beneficial effects. In this methodological study, we propose several ways to improve personalized computational tDCS stimulation prediction modeling. We conclude that connectome-guided personalization of tDCS effects lead to different strategies with potentially better intervention outcomes. For external validation of this model-guided tDCS approach, model predictions are being tested in an ongoing clinical tDCS-MEG trial in AD patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.