ArticleFrontiers in neurology
EEG microstate responses of migraine patients to transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous studies have revealed that migraine patients have unique alterations in their electroencephalography (EEG) microstates; however, no studies have explored the neural responses of migraine patients to therapeutic treatment through EEG microstate analysis. This study applied EEG microstate analysis and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) to explore the neural responses of migraine patients to therapeutic treatment. Methods: Fifty-one migraine patients with or without aura were recruited and randomly divided into TENS (patients were stimulated with half of the maximum tolerable current) or sham TENS (patients were stimulated with 1 mA) groups. Patients underwent resting-state EEG examinations. The EEG microstate parameters of four widely recognized microstate classes A-D were calculated and analyzed. Results: Compared with the activity in the corresponding functional networks of sham TENS group, the brain temporal dynamics depicted by the eyes-closed resting-state microstates of TENS group revealed significantly increased activity in functional networks involving microstate class B (MsB). Moreover, compared with that at baseline, activity in functional networks involving MsB was significantly decreased, and that involving microstate class D (MsD) was increased after sham TENS. Conclusion: Our study revealed that TENS with 1 mA or half of the maximum tolerable current may alter EEG microstate parameters in migraine patients. This study provides new insights into the treatment-related neural responses of migraine patients and a possible basis for evaluating the factors influencing migraine treatment through the use of EEG microstate analysis in the future.
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.