SynthesisJournal of neurology2025
eHealth tools to assess the neurological function for research, in absence of the neurologist: a systematic review, part II (hardware).
Synthesis in Journal of neurology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNeurological disorders pose a substantial burden worldwide in healthcare and health research. eHealth has emerged as a promising field given its potential to aid research, with lower resources. With a changing eHealth landscape, identifying available tools is instrumental for informing future research. A systematic review aimed to map existing software and hardware eHealth assessing neurological signs and/or symptoms for research was conducted. In this second part, the results on hardware are presented.
methodsWe searched for relevant literature using four search engines (PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, & EBSCOHost). eHealth software tools have been described elsewhere, and this paper reports hardware tools only. Data extraction focused on collecting the main characteristics of each tool, including the device type and size, the tool setup, and the neurological components assessed. The data were then summarised in tables.
findingsThis review captured and described 45 relevant hardware tools. They assessed signs and/or symptoms of five neurological domains: cognitive function, cranial nerves, motor function, posture, gait & coordination, and sensation. Heterogeneity among tool types and setups was high, with most tools assessing posture, gait, & coordination. Over time, there has been an increase in the simplification and versatility of tools, with a preference for commercially available and easily accessible hardware.
interpretationThere is already a considerable number of hardware eHealth assessing neurological function that can be used for research purposes. Furthermore, commercially available tools, such as sensors, appear to be preferred due to their reduced costs, easy setup, and high portability. This opens new opportunities to extend neuroepidemiological research cost-effectively, efficiently, and adaptively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39812676What 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.