Research scale
The review included 177 studies involving 6,322 participants.
SAFETY & TOLERABILITYSYSTEMATIC REVIEW & META-ANALYSIS2022
Safety and tolerability of taVNS
Safety of Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation (taVNS): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
This systematic review and meta-analysis examined safety reporting across 177 taVNS studies involving 6,322 participants.
Study in plain English
A broad view of reported taVNS safety
The review assembled safety information across a large and diverse body of taVNS research. Its findings are useful, but incomplete adverse-event reporting limits certainty.
Overall adverse-event risk
The meta-analysis found no difference in overall adverse-event risk between active taVNS and control conditions.
Reporting matters
Adverse-event reporting was incomplete across a substantial proportion of the included literature.
Study design
How the research was structured
Study type
Systematic review and meta-analysis
Included studies
177 studies
Participants
6,322 participants
Main focus
Adverse events, safety reporting, and tolerability
Key findings
What the study reported
Overall risk comparison
The meta-analysis found no difference in the overall risk of developing an adverse event between active taVNS and control conditions.
Frequently reported events
The most frequently reported adverse events included ear pain, headache, and tingling.
Serious adverse events
The authors found no causal relationship between taVNS and serious adverse events in the reviewed research.
Important context
Limitations remain part of the finding.
Adverse-event reporting was incomplete across a substantial proportion of the included studies.
Absence of an identified causal relationship is not the same as proof that every taVNS protocol is risk-free.
Safety findings from a broad literature cannot automatically be transferred to every device, stimulation site, protocol, or user.
What this study does not show
The review does not establish that taVNS has no risks.
It does not replace product-specific contraindications, warnings, instructions, or professional advice.
It is not clinical safety evidence for the Neuvago device itself.
Continue exploring
Related research paths
Safety and Tolerability
Explore adverse-event reporting, study populations, protocol differences, and responsible interpretation.
Explore safety topictaVNS research
Review the broader auricular stimulation field and the variables that affect interpretation.
Explore taVNS topicScientific Studies Library
Browse the complete collection of study summaries and foundational research.
Browse all studiesResearch boundary
This page summarizes peer-reviewed research for educational purposes. The study provides scientific context for the taVNS field and should not be interpreted as clinical evidence for the Neuvago device, medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment guidance.