ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
NSF DARE-transforming modeling in neurorehabilitation: perspectives and opportunities from US funding agencies.
Article 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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A Precision Computational Framework for sLORETA Neurofeedback in Mild Cognitive Impairment: Integration of qEEG Biomarkers and Neuropsychological Metrics.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recognition of the importance and timeliness of computational models for accelerating progress in neurorehabilitation, the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) sponsored a conference in March 2023 at the University of Southern California that drew global participation from engineers, scientists, clinicians, and trainees. This commentary highlights promising applications of computational models to understand neurorehabilitation ("Using computational models to understand complex mechanisms in neurorehabilitation" section), improve rehabilitation care in the context of digital twin frameworks ("Using computational models to improve delivery and implementation of rehabilitation care" section), and empower future interdisciplinary workforces to deliver higher-quality clinical care using computational models ("Using computational models in neurorehabilitation requires an interdisciplinary workforce" section). The authors describe near-term gaps and opportunities, all of which encourage interdisciplinary team science. Four major opportunities were identified including (1) deciphering the relationship between engineering figures of merit-a term commonly used by engineers to objectively quantify the performance of a device, system, method, or material relative to existing state of the art-and clinical outcome measures, (2) validating computational models from engineering and patient perspectives, (3) creating and curating datasets that are made publicly accessible, and (4) developing new transdisciplinary frameworks, theories, and models that incorporate the complexities of the nervous and musculoskeletal systems. This commentary summarizes U.S. funding opportunities by two Federal agencies that support computational research in neurorehabilitation. The NSF has funding programs that support high-risk/high-reward research proposals on computational methods in neurorehabilitation informed by theory- and data-driven approaches. The NIH supports the development of new interventions and therapies for a wide range of nervous system injuries and impairments informed by the field of computational modeling. The conference materials can be found at https://dare2023.usc.edu/ .
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.