Conclusions
The present study did not show any statistically significant difference between tDCS, TMS and sham stimulation regarding naming tasks. The patients'responses to the computational model showed different patterns of current distribution.
Methods
Patients with aphasia received one session of tDCS, TMS or sham stimulation. The time taken to name pictures and the response time were evaluated before and after neuromodulation. Selected patients from the first intervention underwent a computational model stimulation procedure that simulated tDCS.
Objective
Patients undergoing the same neuromodulation protocol may present different responses. Computational models may help in understanding such differences. The aims of this study were, firstly, to compare the performance of aphasic patients in naming tasks before and after one session of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) and sham, and analyze the
Results
The results did not indicate any statistically significant differences from before to after the stimulation.The computational models showed different current flow distributions. Conclusions: The present study did not show any statistically significant difference between tDCS, TMS and sham stimulation regarding naming tasks. The patients'responses to the computational model showed different patterns of current distribution.