Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38435056›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2024

Accelerating neurotechnology development using an Agile methodology.

Anil Kumar Thota, Ranu Jung

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Creating demand for unmet needs: Agile Storytelling.Frontiers in health services · 2024
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anil Kumar ThotaAdaptive Neural Systems Group, The Institute for Integrative and Innovative Research, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States.
Ranu JungAdaptive Neural Systems Group, The Institute for Integrative and Innovative Research, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, United States.
Innovative Research (United States) · US

Funding

Enhancing Sensorimotor Integration Using a Neural Enabled Prosthetic Hand SystemR01EB023261 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT FAYETTEVILLE · PI ABBAS, JAMES J., JUNG, RANU · 2019 to 2023
$2.7M
CRCNS: Improving Bioelectronic Selectivity with Intrafascicular StimulationR01EB027584 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AT FAYETTEVILLE · PI ABBAS, JAMES J., JUNG, RANU · 2018 to 2021
$762k
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB023261NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB027584
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Novel bioelectronic medical devices that target neural control of visceral organs (e.g., liver, gut, spleen) or inflammatory reflex pathways are innovative class III medical devices like implantable cardiac pacemakers that are lifesaving and life-sustaining medical devices. Bringing innovative neurotechnologies early into the market and the hands of treatment providers would benefit a large population of patients inflicted with autonomic and chronic immune disorders. Medical device manufacturers and software developers widely use the Waterfall methodology to implement design controls through verification and validation. In the Waterfall methodology, after identifying user needs, a functional unit is fabricated following the verification loop (design, build, and verify) and then validated against user needs. Considerable time can lapse in building, verifying, and validating the product because this methodology has limitations for adjusting to unanticipated changes. The time lost in device development can cause significant delays in final production, increase costs, and may even result in the abandonment of the device development. Software developers have successfully implemented an Agile methodology that overcomes these limitations in developing medical software. However, Agile methodology is not routinely used to develop medical devices with implantable hardware because of the increased regulatory burden of the need to conduct animal and human studies. Here, we provide the pros and cons of the Waterfall methodology and make a case for adopting the Agile methodology in developing medical devices with physical components. We utilize a peripheral nerve interface as an example device to illustrate the use of the Agile approach to develop neurotechnologies.

Indexed as

Agiledesign controlsmedical device developmentneurotechnologyperipheral neural interfacesverification and validationwaterfall

Identifiers

PMID38435056
PMCPMC10904481
OpenAlexW4391880267

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.