ReviewFrontiers in neurology
Therapeutic potential of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation in cognitive impairment: insights from preclinical and clinical studies.
Review in Frontiers in neurology. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is being investigated as a non-invasive neuromodulatory approach for cognitive impairment (CI). This review evaluates the existing preclinical and clinical evidence regarding its potential efficacy and mechanisms of action in conditions such as mild cognitive impairment, post-stroke cognitive impairment, and other forms of CI. Preclinical models suggest that taVNS may influence multiple pathways, including neurotransmitter regulation, neuroinflammation, apoptosis, and synaptic plasticity. Clinically, some small-scale studies report modest improvements in cognitive metrics, but the evidence remains preliminary due to methodological limitations such as small sample sizes, heterogeneous parameters, and short intervention durations. Significant challenges, including the lack of standardized protocols, inadequate sham controls, and an underdeveloped mechanistic understanding, currently hinder the interpretation and translation of findings. Future research necessitates large-scale, rigorously controlled trials and deeper mechanistic studies to determine whether taVNS has a definitive role in the clinical management of cognitive impairment.
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.