About this Research Topic
Transcranial electrical stimulation (tES), as direct transcranial stimulation (tDCS), is an emerging neuroscientific approach that can be used to explore structure-function relationships as well as to develop innovative therapeutic tools in neurodevelopmental (autism, learning disorder, ADHD), psychiatric (anorexia nervosa, Tourette's syndrome), and neurological (cerebral palsy, post-stroke aphasia) disorders in pediatrics. Despite several attempts to use novel therapeutic interventions in pediatric populations, the conclusions that studies reach are limited by:
(i) the heterogeneity of results, at times, even conflicting;
(ii) the poorly understood brain mechanisms underlying behavioral improvements or recovery of function;
(iii) the risks and potential ethical concerns associated with the application of these techniques in pediatric populations.
iv) the need for protocols to examine adverse effects.
Delving into the applications of tES, even of less explored techniques (e.g., random noise transcranial stimulation or alternating transcranial stimulation), identifying influencing factors (e.g., age, severity of disorder), studying the physiological effects related to tES and its safety risks, could help clarify the current heterogeneity in the literature. Moving to "evidence-based" protocols poses a number of important challenges and complexities, and addressing the questions posed above is an essential step forward in the field.
We seek proposals that investigate the effect of tES in the developing brain or in later stages of development to understand the relationship between brain structure/function and behavior. Studies applying tES to both clinical and non-clinical samples across the lifespan and studies investigating risk factors associated with tES are encouraged. We welcome manuscripts in any of the accepted article formats (e.g. original articles, opinion pieces, mini-reviews, study protocols, or registered reports).
We also encourage authors on this Research Topic to apply Open Science practices, such as sharing data, resources, and analysis scripts to ensure the robustness and transparency of reported results.
(i) the heterogeneity of results, at times, even conflicting;
(ii) the poorly understood brain mechanisms underlying behavioral improvements or recovery of function;
(iii) the risks and potential ethical concerns associated with the application of these techniques in pediatric populations.
iv) the need for protocols to examine adverse effects.
Delving into the applications of tES, even of less explored techniques (e.g., random noise transcranial stimulation or alternating transcranial stimulation), identifying influencing factors (e.g., age, severity of disorder), studying the physiological effects related to tES and its safety risks, could help clarify the current heterogeneity in the literature. Moving to "evidence-based" protocols poses a number of important challenges and complexities, and addressing the questions posed above is an essential step forward in the field.
We seek proposals that investigate the effect of tES in the developing brain or in later stages of development to understand the relationship between brain structure/function and behavior. Studies applying tES to both clinical and non-clinical samples across the lifespan and studies investigating risk factors associated with tES are encouraged. We welcome manuscripts in any of the accepted article formats (e.g. original articles, opinion pieces, mini-reviews, study protocols, or registered reports).
We also encourage authors on this Research Topic to apply Open Science practices, such as sharing data, resources, and analysis scripts to ensure the robustness and transparency of reported results.
Keywords: transcranial direct current stimulation, transcranial alternating stimulation, transcranial random noise stimulation, neuropsychiatric disorders, neurodevelopmental disorders, physiological correlates, evidence-based treatments
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
