Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32655344›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2020

A Review of Sensory Feedback in Upper-Limb Prostheses From the Perspective of Human Motor Control.

Jonathon W Sensinger, Strahinja Dosen

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07418645 (ENG), which is not on this map. Cited by 70 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT07418645 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2026, after this paper: background citation

ENG: Evaluation of the Effectiveness of a Feedback Device Fully Integrated Within a Prosthesis for Users With Upper Limb Amputation. IT: Valutazione Dell'Efficacia di un Dispositivo di Feedback Completamente Integrato All'Interno di Una Protesi, Per Utenti Che Presentano Amputazione Dell'Arto Superiore.

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of PisaRan2026 to 2026Enrolled9ConditionsAmputeesArmsPressure and vibrotactile feedbak, Pressure feedback, Vibrotactile feedback
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Osseoperceptive EMG Feedback Improves Grasp Force Control in Myoelectric Prosthetic Hands.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Using EMG Biofeedback to Restore Closed-Loop Neural Control on a Powered Prosthetic Ankle.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026
    Article
  15. Health-related quality of life after major extremity trauma: qualitative research with military service members and clinicians to inform measurement of patient-reported outcomes.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  16. Effect of Wrist Posture on the Intensity, Size, and Location of Hand Sensations Evoked by Transcutaneous Nerve Stimulation at the Wrist.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Homo Putans: Supposing and Existence.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2025
    Article
  20. Article

10 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

2 authors.

Jonathon W SensingerInstitute of Biomedical Engineering, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, NB, Canada.
Strahinja DosenDepartment of Health Science and Technology, The Faculty of Medicine, Integrative Neuroscience, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This manuscript reviews historical and recent studies that focus on supplementary sensory feedback for use in upper limb prostheses. It shows that the inability of many studies to speak to the issue of meaningful performance improvements in real-life scenarios is caused by the complexity of the interactions of supplementary sensory feedback with other types of feedback along with other portions of the motor control process. To do this, the present manuscript frames the question of supplementary feedback from the perspective of computational motor control, providing a brief review of the main advances in that field over the last 20 years. It then separates the studies on the closed-loop prosthesis control into distinct categories, which are defined by relating the impact of feedback to the relevant components of the motor control framework, and reviews the work that has been done over the last 50+ years in each of those categories. It ends with a discussion of the studies, along with suggestions for experimental construction and connections with other areas of research, such as machine learning.

Indexed as

computational motor controlhuman–machine interfacesprosthesessensory feedbacksensory integration

Identifiers

PMID32655344
PMCPMC7324654

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.