ReviewScientifica2016
Review of Brain-Machine Interfaces Used in Neural Prosthetics with New Perspective on Somatosensory Feedback through Method of Signal Breakdown.
Review in Scientifica, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Towards neuromorphic neurotechnologies: integrating brain-inspired computing with brain-computer interfaces.npj biomedical innovations · 2026Review
- Atypical fetal brain development in fetuses with non-syndromic isolated musculoskeletal birth defects (niMSBDs).Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- Modulating Brain Activity with Invasive Brain-Computer Interface: A Narrative Review.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- Cut wires: The Electrophysiology of Regenerated Tissue.Bioelectronic medicine · 2021Review
- Technological Advances in Prosthesis Design and Rehabilitation Following Upper Extremity Limb Loss.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2020Review
- Ultracompact Multielectrode Array for Neurological Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Article
- Functional Frequency Discrimination From Cortical Somatosensory Stimulation in Humans.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The brain-machine interface (BMI) used in neural prosthetics involves recording signals from neuron populations, decoding those signals using mathematical modeling algorithms, and translating the intended action into physical limb movement. Recently, somatosensory feedback has become the focus of many research groups given its ability in increased neural control by the patient and to provide a more natural sensation for the prosthetics. This process involves recording data from force sensitive locations on the prosthetics and encoding these signals to be sent to the brain in the form of electrical stimulation. Tactile sensation has been achieved through peripheral nerve stimulation and direct stimulation of the somatosensory cortex using intracortical microstimulation (ICMS). The initial focus of this paper is to review these principles and link them to modern day applications such as restoring limb use to those who lack such control. With regard to how far the research has come, a new perspective for the signal breakdown concludes the paper, offering ideas for more real somatosensory feedback using ICMS to stimulate particular sensations by differentiating touch sensors and filtering data based on unique frequencies.
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.