Cited by 102Vagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchNeurological disorders and treatmentsTreatment of Major Depression

Systematic review and meta-analysis of vagus nerve stimulation in the treatment of depression: variable results based on study designs

Martin, J.L.R., Martín-Sánchez, E.·2012·European Psychiatry

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) for treatment of depression. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of analytical studies. Efficacy was evaluated according to severity of illness and percentage of responders. RESULTS: We identified 687 references. Of these, 14 met the selection criteria and were included in the review. The meta-analysis of efficacy for uncontrolled studies showed a significant reduction in scores at the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale endpoint, and the percentage of responders was 31.8% ([23.2% to 41.8%], P<0.001). However, the randomised control trial which covered a sample of 235 patients with depression, reported no statistically significant differences between the active intervention and placebo groups (OR=1.61 [95%CI 0.72 to 3.62]; P=0.25). To study the cause of this heterogeneity, a meta-regression was performed. The adjusted coefficient of determination (R2(Adj)) was 0.84, which implies that an 84% variation in effect size across the studies was explained by baseline severity of depression (P<0.0001). CONCLUSION: Currently, insufficient data are available to describe VNS as effective in the treatment of depression. In addition, it cannot be ruled out that the positive results observed in the uncontrolled studies might have been mainly due to a placebo effect.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.eurpsy.2011.07.006

Cites

50 of 50 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 51 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Martin, J. L. R., & Martín-Sánchez, E.
Venue
European Psychiatry
Published
2012-04
Volume
27
Issue
3
Pages
147-155
ISSN
  • 0924-9338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1778-3585
OpenAlex
W2100055265
Cited by
102
References
51
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 9
FWCI
0.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ABACUS. Repositorio de Producción Científica (Universidad Europea) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vagus Nerve Stimulation Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Neurological disorders and treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
vagus nerve stimulation, depression, treatment efficacy, placebo effect, baseline depression severity, uncontrolled studies, randomized controlled trials, meta-regression, Hamilton Depression Rating Scale
MeSH terms
Depressive Disorder, Humans, Research Design, Severity of Illness Index, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Vagus Nerve Stimulation

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