Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 396

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Neurophysiologic effects of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) via electrical stimulation of the tragus: A concurrent taVNS/fMRI study and review

Open access
Badran, Bashar W., Dowdle, Logan T., Mithoefer, Oliver J., LaBate, Nicholas T., Coatsworth, James, Brown, Joshua C., DeVries, William H., Austelle, Christopher W., McTeague, Lisa M., George, Mark S.·2018·Brain Stimulation

Abstract

Background: Electrical stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagus nerve (ABVN) via transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) may influence afferent vagal networks. There have been 5 prior taVNS/fMRI studies, with inconsistent findings due to variability in stimulation targets and parameters. Objective: We developed a taVNS/fMRI system to enable concurrent electrical stimulation and fMRI acquisition to compare the effects of taVNS in relation to control stimulation. Methods: We enrolled 17 healthy adults in this single-blind, crossover taVNS/fMRI trial. Based on parameters shown to affect heart rate in healthy volunteers, participants received either left tragus (active) or earlobe (control) stimulation at 500 μs 25 HZ for 60 s (repeated 3 times over 6 min). Whole brain fMRI analysis was performed exploring the effect of: active stimulation, control stimulation, and the comparison. Region of interest analysis of the midbrain and brainstem was also conducted. Results: Active stimulation produced significant increased BOLD signal in the contralateral postcentral gyrus, bilateral insula, frontal cortex, right operculum, and left cerebellum. Control stimulation produced BOLD signal activation in the contralateral postcentral gyrus. In the active vs. control contrast, tragus stimulation produced significantly greater BOLD increases in the right caudate, bilateral anterior cingulate, cerebellum, left prefrontal cortex, and mid-cingulate. Conclusion: Stimulation of the tragus activates the cerebral afferents of the vagal pathway and combined with our review of the literature suggest that taVNS is a promising form of VNS. Future taVNS/fMRI studies should systematically explore various parameters and alternative stimulation targets aimed to optimize this novel form of neuromodulation.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.brs.2017.12.009

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 396

Metadata

Authors
Badran, B. W., Dowdle, L. T., Mithoefer, O. J., LaBate, N. T., Coatsworth, J., Brown, J. C., DeVries, W. H., Austelle, C. W., McTeague, L. M., & George, M. S.
Venue
Brain Stimulation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-05
Volume
11
Issue
3
Pages
492-500
ISSN
  • 1876-4754 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-861X
OpenAlex
W2776458751
Cited by
396
References
7
FWCI
7.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.