Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41890346›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2026

Assessing the efficacy and safety of rTMS, tDCS, and DBS in treating auditory hallucinations: a scoping review.

Jiejun Wang

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Jiejun WangBloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Auditory hallucinations (AH)-the perception of sound in the absence of any external auditory stimulus-are among the most clinically significant and personally distressing symptoms encountered in psychiatry and neurology. Although AH is canonically associated with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, where it affects 60-80% of patients at some point in the illness course, it also emerges in major depressive disorder with psychotic features, bipolar disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, borderline personality disorder, substance-induced psychoses, and a range of neurological conditions including epilepsy, Parkinson's disease, Lewy-body dementia, and acquired brain injury. Patients with treatment-resistant AH (TR-AH) experience a substantial decline in their quality of life and face increased economic burden. The limitations of existing pharmaceutical treatments have spurred researchers to develop and assess neuroregulation techniques that can directly target abnormal neural circuits involved in the pathophysiology of AH. This review consolidates the current research findings of stimulation-based treatment methods for AH and aims to conduct an evidence-based evaluation of efficacy, safety, and practical feasibility of three neuromodulation methods: repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), and deep brain stimulation (DBS). By making a comparison of these three methods, this review presents their respective risks and strengths and offers implications for future research direction.

Indexed as

affordabilityauditory hallucinationsdeep brain stimulation (DBS)efficacyneuromodulationrepetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS)safetytranscranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)

Identifiers

PMID41890346
PMCPMC13013423

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.