ArticleNature communications2026
A deep representation learning model to predict response to vagus nerve stimulation.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural morphometry distinguishes vagus nerve stimulation outcomes in individuals with epilepsy.Epilepsia open · 2026Article
- Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Cardiac Neuromodulation: Mechanisms, Applications, and Pathways to Clinical Translation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
47 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Implantable neurotechnologies are increasingly used to reduce seizure burden in pediatric epilepsy. Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS), the most common option, is effective for only half of patients, with no means to predict outcome prior to surgery. As a result, many children undergo invasive and costly procedures without benefit. Although T1-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (T1w) is routinely acquired presurgically and may capture structural brain differences relevant to treatment outcome, its high dimensionality relative to sample sizes has limited its utility in predictive modelling. To address this challenge, we present VQ-VNS, a deep representation learning model to predict VNS outcome based on preoperative T1w (n = 263). First, we present data from the largest paediatric VNS cohort (n = 1046), wherein presurgical clinical data could not predict response (AUC 0.54,p > 0.99). Next, VQ-VNS was pretrained on 7433 T1w images to learn compact anatomical representations enabling its classifier to predict VNS response (AUC = 0.73,p = 0.007). Model predictions localized to serotonin-rich brain regions and inferred large-scale disruptions in network connectivity among non-responders. This biologically interpretable predictor based on routine structural imaging improves upon current clinical decision-making.
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.