Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36220864›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Closed-loop stimulation of lateral cervical spinal cord in upper-limb amputees to enable sensory discrimination: a case study.

Ameya C Nanivadekar, Santosh Chandrasekaran, Eric R Helm, Michael L Boninger, Jennifer L Collinger, Robert A Gaunt, Lee E Fisher

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

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 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Sensory Restoration for Improved Motor Control of Prostheses.Current opinion in biomedical engineering · 2023
    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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Ameya C Nanivadekar *Rehab Neural Engineering Labs, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Santosh Chandrasekaran *Rehab Neural Engineering Labs, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Eric R HelmDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Michael L BoningerRehab Neural Engineering Labs, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Jennifer L CollingerRehab Neural Engineering Labs, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Robert A GauntRehab Neural Engineering Labs, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA.
Lee E FisherRehab Neural Engineering Labs, University of Pittsburgh, 3520 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, Pittsburgh, PA, 15213, USA. lef44@pitt.edu.
University of Pittsburgh · USCarnegie Mellon University · USVA Pittsburgh Healthcare System · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Modern myoelectric prosthetic hands have multiple independently controllable degrees of freedom, but require constant visual attention to use effectively. Somatosensory feedback provides information not available through vision alone and is essential for fine motor control of our limbs. Similarly, stimulation of the nervous system can potentially provide artificial somatosensory feedback to reduce the reliance on visual cues to efficiently operate prosthetic devices. We have shown previously that epidural stimulation of the lateral cervical spinal cord can evoke tactile sensations perceived as emanating from the missing arm and hand in people with upper-limb amputation. In this case study, two subjects with upper-limb amputation used this somatotopically-matched tactile feedback to discriminate object size and compliance while controlling a prosthetic hand. With less than 30 min of practice each day, both subjects were able to use artificial somatosensory feedback to perform a subset of the discrimination tasks at a success level well above chance. Subject 1 was consistently more adept at determining object size (74% accuracy; chance: 33%) while Subject 2 achieved a higher accuracy level in determining object compliance (60% accuracy; chance 33%). In each subject, discrimination of the other object property was only slightly above or at chance level suggesting that the task design and stimulation encoding scheme are important determinants of which object property could be reliably identified. Our observations suggest that changes in the intensity of artificial somatosensory feedback provided via spinal cord stimulation can be readily used to infer information about object properties with minimal training.

Indexed as

AmputeesArtificial LimbsCervical CordFeedback, SensoryHandHumansTouchUpper Extremity

Identifiers

PMID36220864
PMCPMC9553970
OpenAlexW4304185487

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.