Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30593183›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2018

Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation in treating major depressive disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chunxiao Wu, Peihui Liu, Huaili Fu, Wentao Chen, Shaoyang Cui, Liming Lu, Chunzhi Tang

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
39citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

39 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 83 citations in OpenAlex.

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

Chunxiao WuMedical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation.
Peihui LiuMedical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation.
Huaili FuMedical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation.
Wentao ChenMedical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation.
Shaoyang CuiShenzhen Hospital of Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, PR China.
Liming LuClinical Research Center, South China Research Center for Acupuncture and Moxibustion, Medical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation, Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine, Guangzhou.
Chunzhi TangMedical College of Acu-Moxi and Rehabilitation.
Guangzhou University of Chinese Medicine · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS), as a noninvasive intervention, has beneficial effects on major depressive disorder based on clinical observations. However, the potential benefits and clinical role of taVNS in the treatment of major depressive disorder are still uncertain and have not been systematically evaluated. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of taVNS in treating major depressive disorder.

methodsFour electronic databases, namely, Embase, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library and PsycINFO, were searched for all related trials published through May 1, 2018. We extracted the basic information and data of the included studies and evaluated the methodological quality with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and the nonrandomized studies-of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool. A meta-analysis of the comparative effects was conducted using the Review Manager 5.3 software.

resultsA total of 423 citations from the databases were searched, and 4 studies with 222 individuals were included in the meta-analysis. The taVNS technique could decrease 24-item HAMD scores more than the sham intervention (MD: -4.23, 95% CI: -7.15, -1.31; P = .005) and was also more effective in decreasing Self-Rating Depression Scale scores ((MD: -10.34, 95% CI: -13.48, -7.20; P < .00001), Beck Depression Inventory scores (MD: -10.3, 95% CI: -18.1, -2.5; P = .01) and Self-Rating Anxiety Scale scores (MD: -6.57, 95% CI: -9.30, -3.84; P < .00001). However, there was no significant difference in the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale scores between the taVNS and sham taVNS groups (MD: -1.12, 95% CI: -2.56, 0.32; P = .13). No obvious adverse effects of taVNS treatment were reported in the included studies.

conclusionThe results of the analysis preliminarily demonstrated that taVNS therapy can effectively ameliorate the symptoms of major depressive disorder, providing an alternative technique for addressing depression. However, more well-designed RCTs with larger sample sizes and follow-ups are needed in future studies to confirm our findings.

Indexed as

AuriculotherapyEar AuricleHumansMajor Depressive DisorderTreatment OutcomeVagus Nerve Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID30593183
PMCPMC6314717
OpenAlexW2907233789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.