Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38292898›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2023

Comparative analysis of energy transfer mechanisms for neural implants.

Sols Miziev, Wiktoria Agata Pawlak, Newton Howard

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Full-Stack Architectures for Intelligent Brain-Computer Interfaces.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sols Mizievni2o Inc., Washington, DC, United States.
Wiktoria Agata Pawlakni2o Inc., Washington, DC, United States.
Newton Howardni2o Inc., Washington, DC, United States.
Onai (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As neural implant technologies advance rapidly, a nuanced understanding of their powering mechanisms becomes indispensable, especially given the long-term biocompatibility risks like oxidative stress and inflammation, which can be aggravated by recurrent surgeries, including battery replacements. This review delves into a comprehensive analysis, starting with biocompatibility considerations for both energy storage units and transfer methods. The review focuses on four main mechanisms for powering neural implants: Electromagnetic, Acoustic, Optical, and Direct Connection to the Body. Among these, Electromagnetic Methods include techniques such as Near-Field Communication (RF). Acoustic methods using high-frequency ultrasound offer advantages in power transmission efficiency and multi-node interrogation capabilities. Optical methods, although still in early development, show promising energy transmission efficiencies using Near-Infrared (NIR) light while avoiding electromagnetic interference. Direct connections, while efficient, pose substantial safety risks, including infection and micromotion disturbances within neural tissue. The review employs key metrics such as specific absorption rate (SAR) and energy transfer efficiency for a nuanced evaluation of these methods. It also discusses recent innovations like the Sectored-Multi Ring Ultrasonic Transducer (S-MRUT), Stentrode, and Neural Dust. Ultimately, this review aims to help researchers, clinicians, and engineers better understand the challenges of and potentially create new solutions for powering neural implants.

Indexed as

brain computer interfacesbrain implantscapacitive couplingenergy transferinductive couplingoptical energy transferultrasound power transmissionwireless power transmission

Identifiers

PMID38292898
PMCPMC10825050
OpenAlexW4390917629

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.