Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25781934›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Tinnitus: a large VBM-EEG correlational study.

Sven Vanneste, Paul Van De Heyning, Dirk De Ridder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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.

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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review and Perspective on Brain Bases of Tinnitus.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Altered Contralateral Auditory Cortical Morphology in Unilateral Sudden Sensorineural Hearing Loss.Otology & neurotology : official publication of the American Otological Society, American Neurotology Society [and] European Academy of Otology and Neurotology · 2015
    Article
  20. Frontostriatal Gating of Tinnitus and Chronic Pain.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2015
    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

3 authors.

Sven VannesteDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium; School for Behavioral & Brain Sciences, University of Texas at Dallas, Dallas, Texas, United States of America.
Paul Van De HeyningDepartment of Translational Neuroscience, Faculty of Medicine, University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium; ENT Department, University Hospital Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.
Dirk De RidderDepartment of Surgical Sciences, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A surprising fact in voxel-based morphometry (VBM) studies performed in tinnitus is that not one single region is replicated in studies of different centers. The question then rises whether this is related to the low sample size of these studies, the selection of non-representative patient subgroups, or the absence of stratification according to clinical characteristics. Another possibility is that VBM is not a good tool to study functional pathologies such as tinnitus, in contrast to pathologies like Alzheimer's disease where it is known the pathology is related to cell loss. In a large sample of 154 tinnitus patients VBM and QEEG (Quantitative Electroencephalography) was performed and evaluated by a regression analysis. Correlation analyses are performed between VBM and QEEG data. Uncorrected data demonstrated structural differences in grey matter in hippocampal and cerebellar areas related to tinnitus related distress and tinnitus duration. After control for multiple comparisons, only cerebellar VBM changes remain significantly altered. Electrophysiological differences are related to distress, tinnitus intensity, and tinnitus duration in the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, and parahippocampus, which confirms previous results. The absence of QEEG-VBM correlations suggest functional changes are not reflected by co-occurring structural changes in tinnitus, and the absence of VBM changes (except for the cerebellum) that survive correct statistical analysis in a large study population suggests that VBM might not be very sensitive for studying tinnitus.

Indexed as

ElectroencephalographyNeuroimagingAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBrainFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedTinnitusYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID25781934
PMCPMC4364116

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.