Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22741094›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2012

Effects of cranial electrotherapy stimulation on resting state brain activity.

Jamie D Feusner, Sarah Madsen, Teena D Moody, Cara Bohon, Emily Hembacher, Susan Y Bookheimer, Alexander Bystritsky

2 registry-linked trialsAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT03705988 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

A Double-blind, Randomized, Sham-controlled Study of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation as an Add-on Treatment for Tic Disorders in Children and Adolescents(SCATT)

TypeinterventionalSponsorXijing HospitalRan2018 to 2019Enrolled100ConditionsTic Disorder, ChildhoodArmsCranial Electrotherapy Stimulation(CES), sham Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation( sham CES)
NCT04465136 naterminatednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation as Adjunctive Therapy on Anxiety Disorder in Elderly: an Open-label, Pilot Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorKaohsiung Veterans General Hospital.Ran2021 to 2022Enrolled27ConditionsCES, Anxiety Disorders and SymptomsArmsCES, Alpha-Stim stimulator (Electromedical Products International, Inc., Mineral Wells, Texas, USA)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Jamie D Feusner
Sarah Madsen
Teena D Moody
Cara Bohon
Emily Hembacher
Susan Y Bookheimer
Alexander Bystritsky

Funding

Body Dysmorphic Disorder: clinical and neurobiological featuresK23MH079212 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI FEUSNER, JAMIE · 2007 to 2011
$752k
NIMH NIH HHS K23 MH079212
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES) is a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved treatment for insomnia, depression, and anxiety consisting of pulsed, low-intensity current applied to the earlobes or scalp. Despite empirical evidence of clinical efficacy, its mechanism of action is largely unknown. The goal was to characterize the acute effects of CES on resting state brain activity. Our primary hypothesis was that CES would result in deactivation in cortical and subcortical regions. Eleven healthy controls were administered CES applied to the earlobes at subsensory thresholds while being scanned with functional magnetic resonance imaging in the resting state. We tested 0.5- and 100-Hz stimulation, using blocks of 22 sec "on" alternating with 22 sec of baseline (device was "off"). The primary outcome measure was differences in blood oxygen level dependent data associated with the device being on versus baseline. The secondary outcome measures were the effects of stimulation on connectivity within the default mode, sensorimotor, and fronto-parietal networks. Both 0.5- and 100-Hz stimulation resulted in significant deactivation in midline frontal and parietal regions. 100-Hz stimulation was associated with both increases and decreases in connectivity within the default mode network (DMN). Results suggest that CES causes cortical brain deactivation, with a similar pattern for high- and low-frequency stimulation, and alters connectivity in the DMN. These effects may result from interference from high- or low-frequency noise. Small perturbations of brain oscillations may therefore have significant effects on normal resting state brain activity. These results provide insight into the mechanism of action of CES, and may assist in the future development of optimal parameters for effective treatment.

Indexed as

CESdefault mode networkfMRIfronto-parietal networkintrinsic connectivity networkssensorimotor network

Identifiers

PMID22741094
PMCPMC3381625

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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 OpenQuestion graph.