ReviewArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2025
Therapeutic Effects of Noninvasive Technology Modalities on Lower-Limb Motor Function in Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review.
Review in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To systematically evaluate the effects of noninvasive technology modalities, defined as externally applied stimulation or feedback devices, on lower-limb motor outcomes in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI), addressing gaps in generalizability and classification to support evidence-based rehabilitation strategies. Data Sources: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for English-language articles from database inception to 2023 (initial search conducted in April 2024 and updated in January 2025). Study Selection: We included randomized controlled trials involving adults with SCI that investigated noninvasive technology modalities applied to any body region and reported outcomes related to motor score, muscle performance, or walking ability. Of 2325 records screened, 22 full-text articles were independently evaluated by 2 reviewers, and 11 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently extracted data from eligible studies, with disagreements resolved through consensus with a third reviewer. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool by 2 reviewers. Data Synthesis: Across the included studies (224 participants; mean age=44.9 y), interventions typically consisted of 30-minute sessions, 4 times weekly, over 6 weeks. Four studies applied transcranial stimulation, 4 used transspinal stimulation, and 3 targeted muscle stimulation. Outcomes were evaluated in 4 studies for motor score, 7 for muscle performance, and 7 for walking ability. Most interventions, combined with standard rehabilitation, showed improvements across these outcomes, although only a subset demonstrated statistically significant between-group effects. RoB was low in 6 studies, had some concerns in 3, and was high in 2. Conclusions: Noninvasive modalities appear effective in enhancing lower-limb motor function in individuals with SCI. However, variability in intervention protocols and methodological quality limits the ability to draw definitive conclusions. Further studies should standardize protocols and minimize bias to strengthen the evidence for SCI rehabilitation strategies.
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.