ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2024
Utilization of peripheral nerve feedback at a preconscious level.
Article 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 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A methodological framework for the efficient characterization of peripheral nerve stimulation parameters.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Insights into motor impairment assessment using myographic signals with artificial intelligence: a scoping review.Biomedical engineering letters · 2025Review
- Direct Prosthesis Force Control with Tactile Feedback May Connect with the Internal Model.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Sensorimotor integration is important, if not required, when using our hands. The integration of the tactile and motor systems is disrupted in individuals with upper limb amputations because their connection to their fingertips is lost. Direct cortical stimulation allows for modality and location matched perceptions; however, studies show that the time to process and act upon direct cortical feedback significantly exceeds the time to do the same with naturally produced tactile feedback. Direct cortical stimulation does not engage multiple parallel structures in the brain stem meant to integrate tactile feedback with signals from the motor system at a sub-perceptual or pre-perceptual level before the somatosensory cortex is involved. While reasonable to assume, it is not known if the artificially generated signals will engage the same peripheral tactile pathways to the pre-perceptual and perceptual structures as natural tactile sensation. Our hypothesis is that pre-perceptual structures will process the electrically generated neural activity as it would naturally generated neural activity. Methods: In this study, stimulation of the median nerve in multiple subjects' residual limbs produced modal, and location matched sensory perceptions in their hands. We found the time to process different stimuli using simple reaction time tests in three different formats. Results: We showed the minimum time to process peripheral nerve stimulation and initiate a motor plan is similar to naturally generated tactile feedback and is processed upwards of 50 - 175 ms faster than visual feedback alone. We also found the effect of stimulation intensity on the rate of feedback processing follows the same trend of natural sensory feedback, Piéron's law indicating that the unimodal processing of PNS is similar to natural touch. Finally, we found that tactile feedback given to a pre-perceptual level is again used in the motor plan. Discussion: Taken together, we conclude that peripheral nerve stimulation engages the pre-perceptual pathways of the brain, and hence demonstrate advantages of peripheral restoration of sensory inputs.
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.