Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38172799›Full record

ReviewJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024

A review of combined functional neuroimaging and motion capture for motor rehabilitation.

Emanuel A Lorenz, Xiaomeng Su, Nina Skjæret-Maroni

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Emanuel A LorenzDepartment of Computer Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. emanuel.a.lorenz@ntnu.no.
Xiaomeng SuDepartment of Computer Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Nina Skjæret-MaroniDepartment of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTechnological advancements in functional neuroimaging and motion capture have led to the development of novel methods that facilitate the diagnosis and rehabilitation of motor deficits. These advancements allow for the synchronous acquisition and analysis of complex signal streams of neurophysiological data (e.g., EEG, fNIRS) and behavioral data (e.g., motion capture). The fusion of those data streams has the potential to provide new insights into cortical mechanisms during movement, guide the development of rehabilitation practices, and become a tool for assessment and therapy in neurorehabilitation. RESEARCH

objectiveThis paper aims to review the existing literature on the combined use of motion capture and functional neuroimaging in motor rehabilitation. The objective is to understand the diversity and maturity of technological solutions employed and explore the clinical advantages of this multimodal approach.

methodsThis paper reviews literature related to the combined use of functional neuroimaging and motion capture for motor rehabilitation following the PRISMA guidelines. Besides study and participant characteristics, technological aspects of the used systems, signal processing methods, and the nature of multimodal feature synchronization and fusion were extracted.

resultsOut of 908 publications, 19 were included in the final review. Basic or translation studies were mainly represented and based predominantly on healthy participants or stroke patients. EEG and mechanical motion capture technologies were most used for biomechanical data acquisition, and their subsequent processing is based mainly on traditional methods. The system synchronization techniques at large were underreported. The fusion of multimodal features mainly supported the identification of movement-related cortical activity, and statistical methods were occasionally employed to examine cortico-kinematic relationships.

conclusionThe fusion of motion capture and functional neuroimaging might offer advantages for motor rehabilitation in the future. Besides facilitating the assessment of cognitive processes in real-world settings, it could also improve rehabilitative devices' usability in clinical environments. Further, by better understanding cortico-peripheral coupling, new neuro-rehabilitation methods can be developed, such as personalized proprioceptive training. However, further research is needed to advance our knowledge of cortical-peripheral coupling, evaluate the validity and reliability of multimodal parameters, and enhance user-friendly technologies for clinical adaptation.

Indexed as

StrokeStroke RehabilitationFunctional NeuroimagingHumansMotion CaptureReproducibility of ResultsAssessmentMotion captureMotor functionMultimodalNeuroimagingRehabilitationReview

Identifiers

PMID38172799
PMCPMC10765727
OpenAlexW4390533323

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.