ArticleScientific reports2025
Transcutaneous cervical vagus nerve stimulation (tcVNS) does not enhance learning and memory performance in a visual detection task.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation reduces total striatal GABA+ content, increases DLPFC Glu content, and facilitates early-phase motor learning.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
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
Complex changes in our society demand continuous skill development for personal and professional readiness. Transcutaneous cervical vagus nerve stimulation (tcVNS) has the potential to enhance learning by non-invasively delivering electrical pulses to the cervical branch of the vagus nerve. This study aimed to replicate a previous study on the effect of tcVNS on learning. Thirty-four participants completed a four-day training in visual detection and recognition of specific vehicles in Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images. Participants received either active or sham tcVNS before and after training. Performance was assessed immediately post-training and 1-, 30-, and 60-days after the last training. Contrary to expectations, active stimulation did not improve learning, vigilance, or response inhibition compared to sham stimulation. Exploratory analyses suggested a negative association between stimulation intensity and learning outcomes, consistent with an inverted-U dose-response relationship suggesting overstimulation. The absence of physiological biomarkers leaves unresolved whether stimulation failed to engage the vagus nerve, engaged it sub-optimally, or engaged it without downstream cognitive benefits. These findings underscore the importance of parameter optimization and biomarker validation in tcVNS research. Rather than a failed replication, this study offers a cautionary lesson for the field: even seemingly minor methodological choices may critically shape cognitive outcomes.Trial registration. Registered 14/08/2023, registration number NL-OMON53198.
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.