ReviewJournal of anatomy2015
Sensory control of normal movement and of movement aided by neural prostheses.
Review in Journal of anatomy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Therapeutic Potential of Electromyostimulation (EMS) in Critically Ill Patients-A Systematic Review.Frontiers in physiology · 2022Pooled it
- A framework for quantifying the mechanics of dexterous grasp.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Impact of Hyaluronic Acid Lip Filling on the Electromyographic Activity of the Orbicularis Oris Muscle in Adult Women.Indian journal of plastic surgery : official publication of the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India · 2025Article
- Muscle spindles provide flexible sensory feedback for movement sequences.Cell reports · 2025Article
- Adaptation of Transcortical Responses in Upper Extremity Movements During an Elbow Visuomotor Tracking Task in Humans.Journal of functional morphology and kinesiology · 2025Article
- Upper limb muscle reflexes in real and virtual environments: Insights into sensorimotor adaptations.PloS one · 2025Article
- Transforming the Anthropomorphic Passive Free-Flow Foot Prosthesis Into a Powered Foot Prosthesis With Intuitive Control and Sensation (Bionic FFF).Military medicine · 2024Article
- The Reliability of the Timed Up and Go Test among Portuguese Elderly.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Methodological advances for studying gamma motor neurons.Current opinion in physiology · 2021Article
- Comparison of linear frequency and amplitude modulation for intraneural sensory feedback in bidirectional hand prostheses.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Force dynamics and synergist muscle activation in stick insects: the effects of using joint torques as mechanical stimuli.Journal of neurophysiology · 2018Article
- Neurophysiology and neural engineering: a review.Journal of neurophysiology · 2017Review
- Active sensing without efference copy: referent control of perception.Journal of neurophysiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Signals from sensory receptors in muscles and skin enter the central nervous system (CNS), where they contribute to kinaesthesia and the generation of motor commands. Many lines of evidence indicate that sensory input from skin receptors, muscle spindles and Golgi tendon organs play the predominant role in this regard. Yet in spite of over 100 years of research on this topic, some quite fundamental questions remain unresolved. How does the CNS choose to use the ability to control muscle spindle sensitivity during voluntary movements? Do spinal reflexes contribute usefully to load compensation, given that the feedback gain must be quite low to avoid instability? To what extent do signals from skin stretch receptors contribute? This article provides a brief review of various theories, past and present, that address these questions. To what extent has the knowledge gained resulted in clinical applications? Muscles paralyzed as a result of spinal cord injury or stroke can be activated by electrical stimulation delivered by neuroprostheses. In practice, at most two or three sensors can be deployed on the human body, providing only a small fraction of the information supplied by the tens of thousands of sensory receptors in animals. Most of the neuroprostheses developed so far do not provide continuous feedback control. Instead, they switch from one state to another when signals from their one or two sensors meet pre-set thresholds (finite state control). The inherent springiness of electrically activated muscle provides a crucial form of feedback control that helps smooth the resulting movements. In spite of the dissimilarities, parallels can be found between feedback control in neuroprostheses and in animals and this can provide surprising insights in both directions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.