ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2025
Electrical stimulation in upper limb assistance: opportunities and challenges.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. 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.
- Feasibility and safety of multi-field functional electrical stimulation for distal upper-limb rehabilitation after subacute stroke: a randomised controlled feasibility trial.Frontiers in rehabilitation sciences · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The global rise in non-communicable diseases, alongside an aging population, is expected to increase the prevalence of motor impairments and, therefore, the need for assistive care. Upper limb impairments can significantly affect independent living and increase long-term care costs. Wearable assistive devices incorporating electrical stimulation (ES) offer a promising solution to support independence and help alleviate pressures on both formal and informal care provision. The development of hybrid systems, which integrate aspects of robotics and electrical stimulation, aim to overcome the limitations associated with single-modality devices. However, there is limited information on the most appropriate electrical stimulation protocols to use, or on what challenges may be faced in doing so. Correspondingly, this narrative review addresses this gap through assessing the role of electrical stimulation in upper limb assistive technology. By evaluating user requirements and identifying challenges with current stimulation strategies, this review highlights the potential benefits of exploring alternative protocols, beyond conventional functional electrical stimulation (FES) techniques, for upper limb assistance. In particular, addressing practical difficulties of stimulation is likely to be critical for successful user uptake and minimizing device abandonment. The paper subsequently reviews several stimulation strategies which may offer novel research directions and opportunities in the development of upper limb assistive technologies.
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.