ReviewBrain : a journal of neurology2025
On brain stimulation in epilepsy.
Review in Brain : a journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The potential role of the lung-brain axis in the pathophysiology of epilepsy: A hypothesis-driven perspective.Genes & diseases · 2026Review
- From optical control to translational readiness: an evidence-tiered framework for optogenetics in neuromuscular and neurological disorders.Materials today. Bio · 2026Review
- Brain Network Signature of Autoscopic Phenomena in Humans.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2025Article
- Special Issue: Molecular Research in Epilepsy and Epileptogenesis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- Micro-Coil Neuromodulation at Single-Cell and Circuit Levels for Inhibiting Natural Neuroactivity, Neutralizing Electric Neural Excitation, and Suppressing Seizures.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- From Synaptic Plasticity to Neurodegeneration: BDNF as a Transformative Target in Medicine.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain stimulation has, for many decades, been considered as a potential solution for the unmet needs of the many people living with drug-resistant epilepsy. Clinically, there are several different approaches in use, including vagus nerve stimulation, deep brain stimulation of the thalamus, and responsive neurostimulation. Across populations of patients, all deliver reductions in seizure load and sudden unexpected death in epilepsy risk, yet do so variably, and the improvements seem incremental rather than transformative. In contrast, within the field of experimental neuroscience, the transformational impact of optogenetic stimulation is evident; by providing a means to control subsets of neurons in isolation, it has revolutionized our ability to dissect out the functional relations within neuronal microcircuits. It is worth asking, therefore, how preclinical optogenetics research could advance clinical practice in epilepsy? Here, we review the state of the clinical field, and the recent progress in preclinical animal research. We report various breakthrough results, including the development of new models of seizure initiation, its use for seizure prediction, and for fast, closed-loop control of pathological brain rhythms, and what these experiments tell us about epileptic pathophysiology. Finally, we consider how these preclinical research advances may be translated into clinical practice.
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.