ArticleBioelectronic medicine2026
Participant-centered tolerability of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation: insights from two crossover studies.
Article in Bioelectronic medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this 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.
How Does the Length of Pulse Trains and Pulse Intervals Affect Tolerability With Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation?
How Does the Type of Waveform Affect Tolerability With Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation?
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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTranscutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) is a promising noninvasive technique for modulating parasympathetic activity, yet optimal stimulation parameters and comprehensive tolerability profiles remain undefined. Traditional assessments of taVNS tolerability have focused narrowly on safety and adverse events, overlooking participant comfort and subjective experience, which are critical factors for adherence and clinical translation.
methodsWe conducted two randomized crossover trials in healthy adults to evaluate the tolerability of taVNS across different stimulation parameters. Study 1 compared two monophasic duty cycles (30 s on/30 s off vs. 10 s on/10 s off), while study 2 compared monophasic and biphasic waveforms. Tolerability was assessed using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, with secondary outcomes including heart rate variability (HRV), pain sensitivity, and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measures of corticospinal excitability and intracortical inhibition/facilitation.
resultsBoth studies demonstrated high tolerability across all taVNS conditions, with low median ratings for pain and irritation. The most common sensations were tingling, tickling, or pricking, reported by the majority of participants but rated as mild. Qualitative analysis revealed nuanced preferences related to comfort, perceived effectiveness, and ease of adjustment to stimulation. No significant differences in secondary physiological outcomes were observed between conditions, though trends suggested parameter-specific effects on HRV and pain sensitivity.
conclusionsOur findings highlight that taVNS is well tolerated in healthy adults, regardless of duty cycle application or waveform, when tolerability is defined to include comfort and participant experience. Incorporating these dimensions into tolerability assessments may enhance protocol optimization and support broader adoption of taVNS in clinical practice. Further research in clinical populations is warranted.
trial registrationhttps://clinicaltrials.gov , identifiers (NCT06381102 and NCT06614933).
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.