Table 3.

Regression models generated to account for variance in anodal tDCS response

	Ipsilesional parietal cluster				Contralesional frontotemporal cluster
	R 2	p	BIC	ΔBIC	R 2	p	BIC	Δ BIC
Model 1	0.722	0.002	64.277	‐	0.681	0.003	65.661	‐
Model 2	0.863	0.001	59.514	4.763	0.695	0.016	67.501	−1.840
Model 3	0.866	0.005	61.606	2.671	0.711	0.047	69.266	−3.605
Model 4	0.904	0.009	60.561	3.713	0.823	0.040	66.671	−1.01

Model 1 included independent variable of functional connectivity (dwPLI) between the target ipsilesional M1 stimulated with anodal tDCS and the identified electrode cluster. Model 2 included independent variables of functional connectivity and lesion volume. Model 3 included independent variables of functional connectivity, lesion volume, and time since stroke. Model 4 included independent variables of functional connectivity, lesion volume, time since stroke, and age. The Bayesian information criteria (BIC) was used to select the most appropriate model. Lower BIC values indicate a more efficient and/or better fit model. ΔBIC represents change in BIC values from model 1.