Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35620170›Full record

ReviewBrain communications2022

Tinnitus: at a crossroad between phantom perception and sleep.

Linus Milinski, Fernando R Nodal, Vladyslav V Vyazovskiy, Victoria M Bajo

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Brain communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Exploring the Interplay Between Physical Activity and Idiopathic Tinnitus Management: A Scoping Review on Severity Modulation and Perceptual Outcomes.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Linus MilinskiDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Sherrington Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5177-9016
Fernando R NodalDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Sherrington Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1039-6032
Vladyslav V VyazovskiyDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Sherrington Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4336-6681
Victoria M BajoDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Genetics, University of Oxford, Sherrington Building, Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3PT, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3612-2048
University of Oxford · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensory disconnection from the environment is a hallmark of sleep and is crucial for sleep maintenance. It remains unclear, however, whether internally generated percepts-phantom percepts-may overcome such disconnection and, in turn, how sleep and its effect on sensory processing and brain plasticity may affect the function of the specific neural networks underlying such phenomena. A major hurdle in addressing this relationship is the methodological difficulty to study sensory phantoms, due to their subjective nature and lack of control over the parameters or neural activity underlying that percept. Here, we explore the most prevalent phantom percept, subjective tinnitus-or tinnitus for short-as a model to investigate this. Tinnitus is the permanent perception of a sound with no identifiable corresponding acoustic source. This review offers a novel perspective on the functional interaction between brain activity across the sleep-wake cycle and tinnitus. We discuss characteristic features of brain activity during tinnitus in the awake and the sleeping brain and explore its effect on sleep functions and homeostasis. We ask whether local changes in cortical activity in tinnitus may overcome sensory disconnection and prevent the occurrence of global restorative sleep and, in turn, how accumulating sleep pressure may temporarily alleviate the persistence of a phantom sound. Beyond an acute interaction between sleep and neural activity, we discuss how the effects of sleep on brain plasticity may contribute to aberrant neural circuit activity and promote tinnitus consolidation. Tinnitus represents a unique window into understanding the role of sleep in sensory processing. Clarification of the underlying relationship may offer novel insights into therapeutic interventions in tinnitus management.

Indexed as

neural plasticityphantom perceptssleepspontaneous brain activitytinnitus

Identifiers

PMID35620170
PMCPMC9128384
OpenAlexW4226081327

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.