Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31074005›Full record

Trial reportHeadache2019

Remote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN) Relieves Acute Migraine: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Trial.

David Yarnitsky, David W Dodick, Brian M Grosberg, Rami Burstein, Alon Ironi, Dagan Harris, Tamar Lin, Stephen D Silberstein

2 registry-linked trialsOpen access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Headache, 2019. 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 63 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
63citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
13.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT04992897 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Real-world Analysis of Remote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN) for the Acute Treatment of Migraine

TypeobservationalSponsorTheranicaRan2021 to 2021Enrolled12,151ConditionsMigraineArmsRemote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN)
NCT05443659 completednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Real-World Analysis of Remote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN) for the Acute Treatment of Migraine in Adolescence

TypeobservationalSponsorTheranicaRan2021 to 2022Enrolled1,629ConditionsMigraine in AdolescenceArmsNerivio
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

63 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 154 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Non-invasive neuromodulation in the acute treatment of migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Stimulating discussion: neuromodulation for migraine in pregnancy.Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Non-pharmacological approaches for migraine management: a mini-review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review

3 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

8 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

David YarnitskyDepartment of Neurology, Rambam Health Care Campus, Haifa, Israel.
David W DodickDepartment of Neurology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Brian M GrosbergHartford Healthcare Headache Center, Hartford, CT, USA.
Rami BursteinHarvard Medical School and Critical Care and Pain Medicine Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Alon IroniTheranica Bio-Electronics LTD., Netanya, Israel.
Dagan HarrisTheranica Bio-Electronics LTD., Netanya, Israel.
Tamar LinTheranica Bio-Electronics LTD., Netanya, Israel.
Stephen D SilbersteinJefferson Headache Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Netanya Academic College · ILHartford Hospital · USHarvard University · USRambam Health Care Campus · ILThomas Jefferson University · USWinnMed · US

Funding

Cortical Mechanisms of Headache: Beyond CSDR01NS094198 · NINDS · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI BURSTEIN, RAMI · 2016 to 2020
$1.9M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS094198Theranica Bio-Electronics
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the efficacy and safety of a remote electrical neuromodulation (REN) device for the acute treatment of migraine.

backgroundThere is a significant unmet need for novel effective well-tolerated acute migraine treatments. REN is a novel acute migraine treatment that stimulates upper arm peripheral nerves to induce conditioned pain modulation - an endogenous analgesic mechanism in which conditioning stimulation inhibits pain in remote body regions. A recent pilot study showed that REN can significantly reduce headache. We have conducted a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study to further evaluate the efficacy and safety of REN for the acute treatment of migraine.

methodsThis was a randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled, multicenter study conducted at 7 sites in the United States and 5 sites in Israel. Two hundred and fifty-two adults meeting the International Classification of Headache Disorders criteria for migraine with 2-8 migraine headaches per month were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to active or sham stimulation. A smartphone-controlled wireless device was applied for 30-45 minutes on the upper arm within 1 hour of attack onset; electrical stimulation was at a perceptible but non-painful intensity level. Migraine pain levels were recorded at baseline, 2, and 48 hours post-treatment. Most bothersome symptoms (MBS) were also recorded. The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving pain relief at 2 hours post-treatment (improvement from severe or moderate pain to mild or none, or from mild pain to none). Relief of MBS and pain-free at 2 hours were key secondary endpoints.

resultsActive stimulation was more effective than sham stimulation in achieving pain relief (66.7% [66/99] vs 38.8% [40/103]; therapeutic gain of 27.9% [CI

conclusionsREN provides superior clinically meaningful relief of migraine pain and MBS compared to placebo, offering a safe and effective non-pharmacological alternative for acute migraine treatment.

Indexed as

AdultDouble-Blind MethodFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMigraine DisordersPain ManagementTranscutaneous Electric Nerve StimulationTreatment OutcomeWireless Technologyconditioned pain modulationheadachemigraineneuromodulationnon-pharmacological treatmentremote electrical neuromodulation

Identifiers

PMID31074005
PMCPMC6767146
OpenAlexW2944742536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.