ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2024
Case report: A novel transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation improves dysesthesias and motor behaviors after transverse myelitis.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tailored transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation improves dysesthesia in individuals with spinal cord injury: A randomized N-of-1 trial.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2026Trial
- Immediate changes during dysesthesia-matched transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in refractory neuropathic pain: a retrospective observational case series.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Observational
- 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Transverse myelitis (TM)-associated dysesthesia is diverse and frequently resistant to treatment. This study explored the comprehensive effects of a novel transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) approach tailored to an individual's specific dysesthesia profile in a patient with TM. Patient and method: A 52-year-old woman with severe dysesthesias in the left C8 sensory area caused by TM underwent an A-B-A-B-A design intervention. The baseline (phase A) and intervention (phase B) phases were both 7 days. Tingling and allodynia were scored on an 11-point numerical rating scale pre-, post-, and 1 h post-treatment. Upper limb activities during daily living were assessed using a wrist-worn accelerometer. The intervention phase consisted of 60-min sessions of TENS two times daily. Furthermore, the intervention and carry-over effects of TENS were evaluated using Tau-U and Bayesian unknown change point models. Results: The effects of TENS resulted in the immediate improvement in tingling, allodynia, and upper limb activity. Long-term effects of TENS affected tingling and upper limb activity; however, no impacts on allodynia were observed. Conclusion: This novel TENS approach shows promise as an effective treatment, even in rare and treatment-resistant dysesthesia associated with TM.
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.