Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42840704›Full record

Trial reportFrontiers in neurology2026

Brain photobiomodulation therapy for acute sport-related concussion: a randomized, single-blinded, pilot clinical trial (RECOVERY study).

Jean-François Chermann, Philippe Malafosse, Guillaume Champleboux, Julie Bisiaux, Sara Guillemin, Meriem Benmerad, Andréanne Varet, Patrice Cristofini, Guillaume Blivet, Jacques Touchon

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Frontiers in neurology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05647304 (Pilot Clinical Investigation Evaluating the Safety and Performance of RGn550 in Treating Sportspeople Suffering From Acute Concussion Syndrome - A Prospective, Comparative, Randomized, Simple-blinded, Monocentric Investigation [RGncon Investigation]), which is not on this 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.

NCT05647304 nacompletednot on this map

Pilot Clinical Investigation Evaluating the Safety and Performance of RGn550 in Treating Sportspeople Suffering From Acute Concussion Syndrome - A Prospective, Comparative, Randomized, Simple-blinded, Monocentric Investigation [RGncon Investigation]

TypeinterventionalSponsorREGEnLIFE SASRan2022 to 2023Enrolled50ConditionsAcute Concussion SyndromeArmsRGn550 5 Hz-PWM, RGn550 10 Hz-PWM
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

10 authors.

Jean-François ChermannGeorges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France.
Philippe MalafossePrivate Practitioner, Montpellier, France.
Guillaume ChamplebouxREGEnLIFE, Paris, France.
Julie BisiauxRCTs, Lyon, France.
Sara GuilleminRCTs, Lyon, France.
Meriem BenmeradRCTs, Lyon, France.
Andréanne VaretRCTs, Lyon, France.
Patrice CristofiniREGEnLIFE, Paris, France.
Guillaume Blivet *REGEnLIFE, Paris, France.
Jacques TouchonUniversity of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The current standard of care for concussion relies on symptom management; there are almost no disease-modifying treatments. The RECOVERY study investigated the safety of RGn550 (REGEnLIFE), a novel neurostimulation device combining brain photobiomodulation with a static magnetic field, in sportspeople with acute concussion and described concussion-related parameters in patients receiving this therapy. Methods: This prospective, randomized (central randomization, 1:1 ratio), single-blind, monocentric, pilot study compared two pulse frequencies (5 Hz and 10 Hz). Adult sportspeople with a concussion from a shock during sport practice occurring less than 72 h before inclusion were treated for 20 min at day 0 (D0) and D7 and followed up to D52. The primary outcome was the incidence of adverse device effects (ADEs). The secondary outcomes evaluated oculomotor, balance and executive function, concussion symptoms, and blood markers. The sample size was determined by the probability of observing at least one ADE, while all secondary analyses were exploratory and unadjusted for multiplicity. Results: Fifty patients were included, randomized, and treated at least once with 5 Hz ( Conclusion: No difference in tolerability was detected between the 5 and 10 Hz modalities, although the study was neither designed nor powered to establish equivalence. Both conditions were well tolerated. In the absence of a sham comparator, secondary outcome data are hypothesis-generating and cannot be described in terms of efficacy. However, these data still provide the feasibility and variability estimates required to design an adequately powered, double-blind, sham-controlled trial in an indication that currently lacks disease-modifying treatment. Clinical trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05647304, NCT05647304.

Indexed as

Athletic InjuriesBrain ConcussionLow-Level Light TherapyAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsProspective StudiesRecovery of FunctionSingle-Blind MethodTreatment OutcomeYoung Adultbrainclinical trialconcussionmTBIneuromodulationneurotechphotobiomodulationsport

Identifiers

PMID42840704
PMCPMC13640603

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.