ReviewApplied bionics and biomechanics2020
A Review of Different Stimulation Methods for Functional Reconstruction and Comparison of Respiratory Function after Cervical Spinal Cord Injury.
Review in Applied bionics and biomechanics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sexual rehabilitation support experiences of Australian adults living with a spinal cord injury.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2026Article
- Noninvasive Electrical Modalities to Alleviate Respiratory Deficits Following Spinal Cord Injury.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Trans-Spinal Electrical Stimulation Therapy for Functional Rehabilitation after Spinal Cord Injury: Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpinal cord injury (SCI) is a common severe trauma in clinic, hundreds of thousands of people suffer from which every year in the world. In terms of injury location, cervical spinal cord injury (CSCI) has the greatest impact. After cervical spinal cord injury, the lack of innervated muscles is not enough to provide ventilation and other activities to complete the respiratory function. In addition to the decline of respiratory capacity, respiratory complications also have a serious impact on the life of patients. The most commonly used assisted breathing and cough equipment is the ventilator, but in recent years, the functional electrical stimulation method is being used gradually and widely.
methodsAbout hundred related academic papers are cited for data analysis. They all have the following characteristics: (1) basic conditions of patients were reported, (2) patients had received nerve or muscle stimulation and the basic parameters, and (3) the results were evaluated based on some indicators.
resultsThe papers mentioned above are classified as four kinds of stimulation methods: muscle electric/magnetic stimulation, spinal dural electric stimulation, intraspinal microstimulation, and infrared light stimulation. This paper describes the stimulation principle and application experiment. Finally, this paper will compare the indexes and effects of typical stimulation methods, as well as the two auxiliary methods: training and operation.
conclusionsAlthough there is limited evidence for the treatment of respiratory failure by nerve or muscle stimulation after cervical spinal cord injury, the two techniques seem to be safe and effective. At the same time, light stimulation is gradually applied to clinical medicine with its strong advantages and becomes the development trend of nerve stimulation in the future.
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.