Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37251233›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neurology2023

Noninvasive vagus nerve stimulation for migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Dong Song, Piaoyi Li, Yonggang Wang, Jin Cao

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neurology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
9.3field-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.

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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 42 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Resonance massage tool effects in non-migraine headache management.Journal of oral & facial pain and headache · 2025
    Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. [Research progress on vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of chronic pain].Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2025
    Review
  17. Innovations in Treating Headache.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  18. Non-Invasive Neuromodulation in the Treatment of Headache.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2025
    Review
  19. Neural bridging achieves transcutaneous regulation of vagus nerve function and treatment of depressive disorders.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025
    Article
  20. Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Dong SongSchool of Life Sciences, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Piaoyi LiSchool of Life Sciences, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Yonggang WangDepartment of Neurology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou, China.
Jin CaoSchool of Life Sciences, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China.
Beijing University of Chinese Medicine · CNBeijing Tian Tan Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Medication is commonly used to treat migraine. However, patients may experience adverse events or fail to respond to medication. In recent years, neuromodulation techniques have emerged as potential non-pharmacological therapy for migraine. This article focuses on a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (n-VNS) for migraine to determine the efficacy, safety and tolerability of n-VNS. Methods: We searched PUBMED, EMBASE, and Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials databases up to July 15, 2022. Primary outcomes were monthly reduced migraine/headache days, and pain-free rates within 2 h. Secondary outcomes were  ≥ 50% responder rate, headache intensity, monthly acute medication reduction days, and adverse events. Results: Meta-analysis shows that non-invasive cervical vagus nerve stimulation (n-cVNS) significantly impacted ≥50% responder rate (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.47; Conclusion: These findings show that n-VNS is a promising method for migraine management.

Indexed as

curative effectmigrainenon-invasive auricular vagus nerve stimulation (n-aVNS)non-invasive cervical vagus nerve stimulation (n-cVNS)non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (n-VNS)

Identifiers

PMID37251233
PMCPMC10213755
OpenAlexW4376279327

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.