An assessor-blinded, randomized comparative trial of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) combined with cranial electroacupuncture vs. citalopram for depression with chronic pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Depression accompanying chronic pain (CP) is one of the most common comorbid psychiatric disorders. This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) combined with electroacupuncture at Baihui (GV20) and Yintang (GV29) acupoints compared with citalopram. Methods Sixty patients with depression and pain comorbidity were enrolled in a prospective 8-week, single-blind, randomized controlled trial. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either taVNS combined with electroacupuncture treatment (taVNS: 8 weeks, 3 sessions per week; electroacupuncture: 8 weeks, twice per day, no drugs) or citalopram treatment (8 weeks, 40 mg/day). The primary outcome was Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). The secondary endpoints were evaluated using the McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), self-reported 36-Item Short Form Survey (SF-36), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) and Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). Results Both the taVNS combined with electroacupuncture and citalopram groups had significant reductions in depressive and pain symptoms, as indicated by the decrease in MARDS and SF-MPQ scores. Regarding the analgesic effect, the pain intensity score of the SF-MPQ showed a larger reduction with citalopram than with taVNS combined with electroacupuncture at 6 weeks ( P = 0.036). The reduction in the BP score of the SF-36 was higher at week 4 ( P = 0.000), with no significant difference observed at week 8 ( P = 0.1110). This result indicated that the pain intensity can be improved rapidly with citalopram compared with taVNS combined with electroacupuncture. Similarly, the comparison of PSQI scores at 4, 6, and 8 weeks indicates that there was no significant difference between groups, except in the use of sleeping medications. At week 6, higher medication use was found in the citalopram group than in the taVNS combined with electroacupuncture group ( P = 0.049). Conclusion In summary, compared with citalopram, taVNS combined with electroacupuncture produces similar positive effects on depressive and pain symptoms in patients with depression and chronic pain, which last for at least 8 weeks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".