Evidence for a modulating effect of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) on salivary alpha-amylase as indirect noradrenergic marker: A pooled mega-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non-invasive transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has received tremendous attention as a potential neuromodulator of cognitive and affective functions, which likely exerts its effects via activation of the locus coeruleus-noradrenaline (LC-NA) system. Reliable effects of taVNS on markers of LC-NA system activity, however, have not been demonstrated yet. METHODS: The aim of the present study was to overcome previous limitations by pooling raw data from a large sample of ten taVNS studies (371 healthy participants) that collected salivary alpha-amylase (sAA) as a potential marker of central NA release. RESULTS: While a meta-analytic approach using summary statistics did not yield any significant effects, linear mixed model analyses showed that afferent stimulation of the vagus nerve via taVNS increased sAA levels compared to sham stimulation (b = 0.16, SE = 0.05, p = 0.001). When considering potential confounders of sAA, we further replicated previous findings on the diurnal trajectory of sAA activity. CONCLUSION(S): Vagal activation via taVNS increases sAA release compared to sham stimulation, which likely substantiates the assumption that taVNS triggers NA release. Moreover, our results highlight the benefits of data pooling and data sharing in order to allow stronger conclusions in research.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.020 | 0.033 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.030 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".