Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24904405›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroengineering2014

Organic electrode coatings for next-generation neural interfaces.

Ulises A Aregueta-Robles, Andrew J Woolley, Laura A Poole-Warren, Nigel H Lovell, Rylie A Green

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review 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 74 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
74citing papers in PubMed
11.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

74 citing papers in PubMed, 251 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Chemical reviews · 2022
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

14 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ulises A Aregueta-RoblesGraduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Andrew J WoolleyGraduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW, Australia ; School of Medicine, University of Western Sydney Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Laura A Poole-WarrenGraduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Nigel H LovellGraduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Rylie A GreenGraduate School of Biomedical Engineering, University of New South Wales Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Western Sydney University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Traditional neuronal interfaces utilize metallic electrodes which in recent years have reached a plateau in terms of the ability to provide safe stimulation at high resolution or rather with high densities of microelectrodes with improved spatial selectivity. To achieve higher resolution it has become clear that reducing the size of electrodes is required to enable higher electrode counts from the implant device. The limitations of interfacing electrodes including low charge injection limits, mechanical mismatch and foreign body response can be addressed through the use of organic electrode coatings which typically provide a softer, more roughened surface to enable both improved charge transfer and lower mechanical mismatch with neural tissue. Coating electrodes with conductive polymers or carbon nanotubes offers a substantial increase in charge transfer area compared to conventional platinum electrodes. These organic conductors provide safe electrical stimulation of tissue while avoiding undesirable chemical reactions and cell damage. However, the mechanical properties of conductive polymers are not ideal, as they are quite brittle. Hydrogel polymers present a versatile coating option for electrodes as they can be chemically modified to provide a soft and conductive scaffold. However, the in vivo chronic inflammatory response of these conductive hydrogels remains unknown. A more recent approach proposes tissue engineering the electrode interface through the use of encapsulated neurons within hydrogel coatings. This approach may provide a method for activating tissue at the cellular scale, however, several technological challenges must be addressed to demonstrate feasibility of this innovative idea. The review focuses on the various organic coatings which have been investigated to improve neural interface electrodes.

Indexed as

carbon nanotubescoatingsconductive polymershydrogelsliving electrodesmaterial properties

Identifiers

PMID24904405
PMCPMC4034607
OpenAlexW2093896099

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.