ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2021
Using Transcranial Electrical Stimulation in Audiological Practice: The Gaps to Be Filled.
Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bibliometric mapping of non-invasive brain stimulation techniques (NIBS) for fluent speech production.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
- On the Role of Neural Oscillations Across Timescales in Speech and Music Processing.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effects of transcranial electrical stimulation (tES) approaches have been widely studied for many decades in the motor field, and are well known to have a significant and consistent impact on the rehabilitation of people with motor deficits. Consequently, it can be asked whether tES could also be an effective tool for targeting and modulating plasticity in the sensory field for therapeutic purposes. Specifically, could potentiating sensitivity at the central level with tES help to compensate for sensory loss? The present review examines evidence of the impact of tES on cortical auditory excitability and its corresponding influence on auditory processing, and in particular on hearing rehabilitation. Overall, data strongly suggest that tES approaches can be an effective tool for modulating auditory plasticity. However, its specific impact on auditory processing requires further investigation before it can be considered for therapeutic purposes. Indeed, while it is clear that electrical stimulation has an effect on cortical excitability and overall auditory abilities, the directionality of these effects is puzzling. The knowledge gaps that will need to be filled are discussed.
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.