Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32175133›Full record

ReviewBiomedical engineering letters2020

Advanced technologies for intuitive control and sensation of prosthetics.

Erik J Wolf, Theresa H Cruz, Alfred A Emondi, Nicholas B Langhals, Stephanie Naufel, Grace C Y Peng, Brian W Schulz, Michael Wolfson

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Biomedical engineering letters, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. 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

8 authors at 7 institutions in 3 countries.

Erik J Wolf1Clinical and Rehabilitative Medicine Research Program, US Army Medical Research and Development Command, Fort Detrick, MD 21702 USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6353-7978
Theresa H Cruz2National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD 20817 USA.
Alfred A Emondi3Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, Arlington, VA 22203 USA.
Nicholas B Langhals4National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892 USA.
Stephanie NaufelECS, Fairfax, VA 22031 USA.
Grace C Y Peng6National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD 20817 USA.
Brian W Schulz7VA Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC 20002 USA.
Michael Wolfson6National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, MD 20817 USA.
National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering · USDefense Advanced Research Projects Agency · USEnvironmental Consultants and Contractors · USNational Institute of Child Health · HUNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke · USUnited States Army Medical Research and Development Command · USVA Office of Research and Development · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs and National Institutes of Health have invested significantly in advancing prosthetic technologies over the past 25 years, with the overall intent to improve the function, participation and quality of life of Service Members, Veterans, and all United States Citizens living with limb loss. These investments have contributed to substantial advancements in the control and sensory perception of prosthetic devices over the past decade. While control of motorized prosthetic devices through the use of electromyography has been widely available since the 1980s, this technology is not intuitive. Additionally, these systems do not provide stimulation for sensory perception. Recent research has made significant advancement not only in the intuitive use of electromyography for control but also in the ability to provide relevant meaningful perceptions through various stimulation approaches. While much of this previous work has traditionally focused on those with upper extremity amputation, new developments include advanced bidirectional neuroprostheses that are applicable to both the upper and lower limb amputation. The goal of this review is to examine the state-of-the-science in the areas of intuitive control and sensation of prosthetic devices and to discuss areas of exploration for the future. Current research and development efforts in external systems, implanted systems, surgical approaches, and regenerative approaches will be explored.

Indexed as

Brain–machine interfaceLimb lossMuscleOsseointegrationPeripheral nerveRegenerative

Identifiers

PMID32175133
PMCPMC7046895
OpenAlexW2968677915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.