Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20626436›Full record

ReviewCNS neuroscience & therapeutics2011

Brain stimulation: new vistas for the exploration and treatment of tinnitus.

Christian Plewnia

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in CNS neuroscience & therapeutics, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.4field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. [The physiological function of cingulate cortex and its role in the mechanism of tinnitus].Lin chuang er bi yan hou tou jing wai ke za zhi = Journal of clinical otorhinolaryngology head and neck surgery · 2020
    Review
  5. Reply to CollPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Changes in interoceptive processes following brain stimulation.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2016
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Chronic tinnitus: an interdisciplinary challenge.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2013
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Predictors for rTMS response in chronic tinnitus.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2012
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christian PlewniaDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Neurophysiology and Interventional Psychiatry, University of Tübingen Medical School, Tübingen, Germany. christian.plewnia@uni-tuebingen.de
Universitätsklinikum Tübingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTinnitus, the perception of sounds or noise in the absence of auditory stimuli, is a frequent and often severely disabling symptom of different disorders of the auditory system. Attempts to develop evidence-based therapies have been thwarted by a poor understanding of the underlying pathophysiology. However, recent work points toward a pivotal role of maladaptive cortical reorganization in the generation and perpetuation of tinnitus. Changes in the representation of sounds, abnormalities of oscillatory activity, and hyperactivity in higher order areas of auditory processing have been linked with the perception of tinnitus. Brain stimulation techniques have entered the field and have opened exciting new perspectives for the modulation of dysfunctional brain activity. In this review, a comprehensive overview on the use of brain-stimulation techniques in the exploration and experimental treatment of tinnitus is provided. DISCUSSIONS: Noninvasive and invasive brain stimulation techniques, for example, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), direct current stimulation (tDCS), and direct electrical cortical stimulation gave rise to a new line of investigation in tinnitus research. First, it has been shown that focal interference with presumably pathological cortical function can reduce tinnitus at least transiently. Second, the reduction of tinnitus-associated enhancement of cortical activity by neuronavigated TMS has been demonstrated to ameliorate tinnitus. Third, preliminary data suggest that repeated application of TMS or continuous cortical stimulation may lead to a longer lasting suppression of tinnitus.

conclusionsThese proof of principle studies point toward a new option for the investigation and neurophysiology based treatment of tinnitus. Based on these findings, larger scale randomized clinical trials are needed to explore the efficacy of different brain stimulation techniques and parameters as well as the optimal target sites and treatment schedules. Particularly, a careful evaluation of clinical relevance under consideration of an adequate sham control and attention to possible unwanted side effects of these new interventions are indispensable.

Indexed as

AnimalsBrainClinical Trials as TopicElectric Stimulation TherapyHumansTinnitusTranscranial Magnetic StimulationTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID20626436
PMCPMC6493894
OpenAlexW1561719304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.