Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24795621›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroengineering2014

Smaller, softer, lower-impedance electrodes for human neuroprosthesis: a pragmatic approach.

Elisa Castagnola, Alberto Ansaldo, Emma Maggiolini, Tamara Ius, Miran Skrap, Davide Ricci, Luciano Fadiga

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroengineering, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Full-Stack Architectures for Intelligent Brain-Computer Interfaces.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The Evolution of Neuroprosthetic Interfaces.Critical reviews in biomedical engineering · 2016
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Elisa CastagnolaRobotics, Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Genoa, Italy.
Alberto AnsaldoRobotics, Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Genoa, Italy.
Emma MaggioliniRobotics, Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Genoa, Italy.
Tamara IusStruttura Complessa di Neurochirurgia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Santa Maria della Misericordia Udine, Italy.
Miran SkrapStruttura Complessa di Neurochirurgia, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Santa Maria della Misericordia Udine, Italy.
Davide RicciRobotics, Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Genoa, Italy.
Luciano FadigaRobotics, Brain and Cognitive Sciences Department, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia Genoa, Italy ; Section of Human Physiology, Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Ferrara Ferrara, Italy.
Italian Institute of Technology · ITOspedale Santa Maria della Misericordia di Udine · ITUniversity of Ferrara · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Finding the most appropriate technology for building electrodes to be used for long term implants in humans is a challenging issue. What are the most appropriate technologies? How could one achieve robustness, stability, compatibility, efficacy, and versatility, for both recording and stimulation? There are no easy answers to these questions as even the most fundamental and apparently obvious factors to be taken into account, such as the necessary mechanical, electrical and biological properties, and their interplay, are under debate. We present here our approach along three fundamental parallel pathways: we reduced electrode invasiveness and size without impairing signal-to-noise ratio, we increased electrode active surface area by depositing nanostructured materials, and we protected the brain from direct contact with the electrode without compromising performance. Altogether, these results converge toward high-resolution ECoG arrays that are soft and adaptable to cortical folds, and have been proven to provide high spatial and temporal resolution. This method provides a piece of work which, in our view, makes several steps ahead in bringing such novel devices into clinical settings, opening new avenues in diagnostics of brain diseases, and neuroprosthetic applications.

Indexed as

brain-conformabilitycarbon nanotubesconductive polymershydrogelIntracortical microelectrodesmicro-electrocorticography (ECoG)neural recordingneural stimulation

Identifiers

PMID24795621
PMCPMC3997015
OpenAlexW2049956558

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.