Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37736411›Full record

ArticlePhysiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada2023

Scoping Review on Brain-Computer Interface-Controlled Electrical Stimulation Interventions for Upper Limb Rehabilitation in Adults: A Look at Participants, Interventions, and Technology.

Lazar I Jovanovic, Hope Jervis Rademeyer, Maureen Pakosh, Kristin E Musselman, Milos R Popovic, Cesar Marquez-Chin

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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.

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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Clinician's Commentary on Jovanovic et al.Physiotherapy Canada. Physiotherapie Canada · 2023
    Article
  4. Identifying Thematics in a Brain-Computer Interface Research.Computational intelligence and neuroscience · 2023
    Review
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

6 authors.

Lazar I JovanovicFrom the: Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Hope Jervis RademeyerKITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Maureen PakoshLibrary & Information Services, University Health Network, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, Toronto, Canada.
Kristin E MusselmanKITE Research Institute, Toronto Rehabilitation Institute, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada.
Milos R PopovicFrom the: Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Cesar Marquez-ChinFrom the: Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: While current rehabilitation practice for improving arm and hand function relies on physical/occupational therapy, a growing body of research evaluates the effects of technology-enhanced rehabilitation. We review interventions that combine a brain-computer interface (BCI) with electrical stimulation (ES) for upper limb movement rehabilitation to summarize the evidence on (1) populations of study participants, (2) BCI-ES interventions, and (3) the BCI-ES systems. Method: After searching seven databases, two reviewers identified 23 eligible studies. We consolidated information on the study participants, interventions, and approaches used to develop integrated BCI-ES systems. The included studies investigated the use of BCI-ES interventions with stroke and spinal cord injury (SCI) populations. All studies used electroencephalography to collect brain signals for the BCI, and functional electrical stimulation was the most common type of ES. The BCI-ES interventions were typically conducted without a therapist, with sessions varying in both frequency and duration. Results: Of the 23 eligible studies, only 3 studies involved the SCI population, compared to 20 involving individuals with stroke. Conclusions: Future BCI-ES interventional studies could address this gap. Additionally, standardization of device and rehabilitation modalities, and study-appropriate involvement with therapists, can be considered to advance this intervention towards clinical implementation.

Indexed as

brain-computer interfaceselectric stimulationelectric stimulation therapyneurological rehabilitationupper extremity

Identifiers

PMID37736411
PMCPMC10510539

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.