ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Efficacy of Remote Electrical Neuromodulation (REN) on Migraine-Induced Neuronal Activity: A Systematic Review.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
This systematic review evaluated the efficacy of Remote Electrical str Neuromodulation (REN) in migraine-induced neuronal activity. A PubMed and Google Scholar search identified studies published between 2007 and 2025. Inclusion criteria focused on randomized controlled trials, open-label studies, and real-world observational studies that evaluated REN for migraine treatment. Duplicate reports and studies with insufficient information were excluded. Data extraction and quality assessment followed preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The results showed that 10 peer-reviewed studies were included (4 Randomized Controlled Trials [RCTs], 4 open-label studies, and 2 real-world observational studies). REN demonstrated significant improvements in pain freedom and pain relief at 2 hours compared to placebo (pain freedom: 41-46% vs. 20-25%, pain relief: 59-67% vs. 35-42%). Patients treated with REN also showed significant reductions in migraine attacks and improved daily functioning. REN was well-tolerated, with minimal side effects, primarily mild local paresthesia or skin sensitivity. The majority of RCTs had low risk of bias, though observational studies exhibited a higher risk. It was concluded that REN may serve as a valuable nonpharmacologic option for migraine management.
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.