ArticleScientific reports2022
Cognitive benefits of using non-invasive compared to implantable neural feedback.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Integrating neural decoding, memristive materials, and adaptive control frameworks for next-generation hippocampal memory prosthetics.iScience · 2026Review
- Merging neural stimulation and exoskeletons to enhance sensorimotor hand functions after brain or spinal cord injury.Science advances · 2026Article
- The proprioception illusion can simulate limb movement in persons with limb difference.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Development and assessment of vibrotactile feedback from the embedded sensors of a microprocessor-controlled knee prosthesis.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Impact of Long-Term Home and Community Use of a Lower Limb Sensory Neuroprosthesis.Research square · 2025Article
- A worldwide research overview of Artificial Proprioception in prosthetics.PLOS digital health · 2025Review
- The Next Frontier in Neuroprosthetics: Integration of Biomimetic Somatosensory Feedback.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Amputees but not healthy subjects optimally integrate non-spatially matched visuo-tactile stimuli.iScience · 2025Article
- Sensory feedback for gait in transtibial amputees: a narrative review of technologies and clinical outcomes.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Somatosensory restoration and neural control strategies in lower-limb prostheses.npj biomedical innovations · 2025Review
- Restoring Somatotopic Sensory Feedback in Lower Limb Amputees through Noninvasive Nerve Stimulation.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Wearable non-invasive neuroprosthesis for targeted sensory restoration in neuropathy.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Closing the sensory feedback loop is necessary for effective neurorehabilitation.PLoS biology · 2024Article
- User experience of a seizure risk forecasting app: A mixed methods investigation.Epilepsy & behavior : E&B · 2024Article
- Article
- Merging Humans and Neuroprosthetics through Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces.Seminars in plastic surgery · 2024Review
- Neuromorphic hardware for somatosensory neuroprostheses.Nature communications · 2024Review
- Implementing social and affective touch to enhance user experience in human-robot interaction.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2024Article
- The impact of walking on the perception of multichannel electrotactile stimulation in individuals with lower-limb amputation and able-bodied participants.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Symbiotic electroneural and musculoskeletal framework to encode proprioception via neurostimulation: ProprioStim.iScience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A non-optimal prosthesis integration into an amputee's body schema suggests some important functional and health consequences after lower limb amputation. These include low perception of a prosthesis as a part of the body, experiencing it as heavier than the natural limb, and cognitively exhausting use for users. Invasive approaches, exploiting the surgical implantation of electrodes in residual nerves, improved prosthesis integration by restoring natural and somatotopic sensory feedback in transfemoral amputees. A non-invasive alternative that avoids surgery would reduce costs and shorten certification time, significantly increasing the adoption of such systems. To explore this possibility, we compared results from a non-invasive, electro-cutaneous stimulation system to outcomes observed with the use of implants in above the knee amputees. This non-invasive solution was tested in transfemoral amputees through evaluation of their ability to perceive and recognize touch intensity and locations, or movements of a prosthesis, and its cognitive integration (through dual task performance and perceived prosthesis weight). While this managed to evoke the perception of different locations on the artificial foot, and closures of the leg, it was less performant than invasive solutions. Non-invasive stimulation induced similar improvements in dual motor and cognitive tasks compared to neural feedback. On the other hand, results demonstrate that remapped, evoked sensations are less informative and intuitive than the neural evoked somatotopic sensations. The device therefore fails to improve prosthesis embodiment together with its associated weight perception. This preliminary evaluation meaningfully highlights the drawbacks of non-invasive systems, but also demonstrates benefits when performing multiple tasks at once. Importantly, the improved dual task performance is consistent with invasive devices, taking steps towards the expedited development of a certified device for widespread use.
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.