SynthesisTranslational psychiatry2025
The safety and efficacy of gamma frequency auditory and visual stimulation in the treatment of alzheimer's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Translational psychiatry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Application of neurodegenerative disease treatment strategies in tinnitus: mechanisms, translation, and prospects.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Review
- Neuroinflammation in Alzheimer's disease-associated sensory dysfunction: mechanistic links, actionable targets and therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder associated with cognitive decline and significant global health burden. Current treatments offer limited benefits, highlighting the need for novel therapies. Gamma-frequency auditory and visual stimulation (GFAVS), utilizing 40 Hz neuromodulation, has gained attention as a non-invasive treatment for cognitive deficits and underlying pathophysiology in AD.
objectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of GFAVS in treating Alzheimer's disease (AD) and mild cognitive impairment (MCI).
methodsA comprehensive literature search across multiple databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase) was performed up to November 2025. Controlled trials involving adults (≥50 years) with AD or MCI, using GFAVS, were included. Meta-analyses assessed adverse events, cognitive function, and brain changes.
resultsEleven studies (341 participants) were included. GFAVS was safe, with no significant increase in overall adverse events (RR = 0.99, P = 0.93; RD = -0.01, P = 0.93). However, GFAVS significantly increased the risk of tinnitus (RR = 6.46, P = 0.08; RD = 0.16, P = 0.01). GFAVS significantly improved structural brain changes (SMD = 1.74, P = 0.02), especially in mixed AD and MCI populations (SMD = 3.05, P < 0.00001). Nevertheless, no significant improvements were observed in cognitive function (SMD = 0.16, 95% CI [-0.36 to 0.68], P = 0.55) or activities of daily living (SMD = 0.53, 95% CI [-1.26 to 2.33], P = 0.56), despite the observed structural brain changes. High heterogeneity was observed.
conclusionGFAVS appears to be well tolerated and may induce structural brain alterations in individuals with Alzheimer's disease or mild cognitive impairment; however, its impact on cognition or daily functioning remains to be established. Large-scale, rigorously designed trials are required to clarify optimal protocols and address the observed heterogeneity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.