ArticleTherapeutic advances in chronic disease2021
Electrical stimulation to treat tinnitus: a meta-analysis and systemic review of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Therapeutic advances in chronic disease, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Low intensity transcranial electric stimulation: Safety, ethical, legal regulatory and application guidelines (2017-2025: An update) - endorsed by the European Society for Brain Stimulation (ESBS) and by the International Federation for Clinical Neurophysiology (IFCN).Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026Review
- Current and Emerging Therapies for Chronic Subjective Tinnitus.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Tinnitus Guidelines and Their Evidence Base.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- State of the art: non-invasive electrical stimulation for the treatment of chronic tinnitus.Therapeutic advances in chronic disease · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsTinnitus is one of the most common otological symptoms that patients experience, and it can be debilitating. No effective drug treatments are available for tinnitus, although considerable research investigating its mechanisms and possible treatments is underway. Electrical stimulation has been considered a promising and well-tolerated therapeutic strategy for tinnitus. This meta-analysis study was aimed to investigate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of electrical stimulation in patients with tinnitus.
methodsRelevant studies were retrieved from the Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM), Wanfang and Weipu databases. The Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI) and the visual analogue scale (VAS) which focus on loudness and distress evaluation (0-10 points) were used to assess perceived tinnitus suppression after treatment. Subgroup analysis was also performed based on different stimulating areas and methods, follow-up times, tinnitus duration and electrical current intensity. Review Manager 5.4 software was used for data synthesis, and Stata 15.1 software was used for analyses of publication bias and sensitivity.
resultsOur meta-analysis included 11 studies involving a total of 447 patients with tinnitus. The results showed that electrical stimulation significantly reduced THI scores [mean difference (MD) = -9.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) = -14.25, -5.13;
conclusionOverall, electrical stimulation may be an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for tinnitus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.