Trial reportPsychophysiology2025
Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation modifies cortical excitability in middle-aged and older adults.
Trial report in Psychophysiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sorting the mind: cognitive enhancement through transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Psychological medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation during short-term motor practice drives cortical plasticity without behavioural improvement.The Journal of physiology · 2026Trial
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation paired with task-specific training for improving walking and balance in chronic stroke: a double-blind, randomised controlled feasibility trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Trial
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation modifies cortical excitability in middle-aged and older adults.Psychophysiology · 2025Trial
- Effects of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation on motor function in older adults: a randomized crossover study.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2026Article
- A Multiscale Spatiotemporal Causal Mapping Algorithm for Revealing Neural Network Mechanisms of Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Participant-centered tolerability of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation: insights from two crossover studies.Bioelectronic medicine · 2026Article
- Article
- Non-invasive neuroregulation techniques applied to patients with consciousness disorders: a narrative review.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- Differential Impacts of Fronto-Cerebellar tACS and tVNS on Motor Learning: Evidence for Sex-Related Neural Modulation.Neural plasticity · 2026Article
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation: mechanisms, applications, and research progress.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Review
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation improves cortical functional topological properties and intracortical facilitation in patients with Parkinson's disease.NPJ Parkinson's disease · 2025Article
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation in healthy individuals, stroke, and Parkinson's disease: a narrative review of safety, parameters, and efficacy.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Review
- Task-specific cortical mechanisms of taVNS-paired task-oriented training for post-stroke upper extremity dysfunction under cognitive load: an fNIRS study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is a growing interest in the clinical application of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS). However, its effect on cortical excitability, and whether this is modulated by stimulation duration, remains unclear. We evaluated whether taVNS can modify excitability in the primary motor cortex (M1) in middle-aged and older adults and whether the stimulation duration moderates this effect. In addition, we evaluated the blinding efficacy of a commonly reported sham method. In a double-blinded randomized cross-over sham-controlled study, 23 healthy adults (mean age 59.91 ± 6.87 years) received three conditions: active taVNS for 30 and 60 min and sham for 30 min. Single and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was delivered over the right M1 to evaluate motor-evoked potentials. Adverse events, heart rate and blood pressure measures were evaluated. Participant blinding effectiveness was assessed via guesses about group allocation. There was an increase in short-interval intracortical inhibition (F = 7.006, p = .002) and a decrease in short-interval intracortical facilitation (F = 4.602, p = .014) after 60 min of taVNS, but not 30 min, compared to sham. taVNS was tolerable and safe. Heart rate and blood pressure were not modified by taVNS (p > .05). Overall, 96% of participants detected active stimulation and 22% detected sham stimulation. taVNS modifies cortical excitability in M1 and its effect depends on stimulation duration in middle-aged and older adults. taVNS increased GABA
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.