Determination of Current Flow Induced by Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Migraine: Potential for Optimization.

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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

1. Interventional neuromodulation techniques for cervicogenic headache.Journal of anesthesia and translational medicine · 2025
   Article
2. The interplay between pulse width and activation depth in TENS: a computational study.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025
   Article
3. Unpacking Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation using simulations and relating current flow to reported motions: Comparison across common and specialized electrode placements.PloS one · 2024
   Article
4. Impact of galvanic vestibular stimulation electrode current density on brain current flow patterns: Does electrode size matter?PloS one · 2023
   Article

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as