SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Biomarkers of stroke recovery using EEG-based resting-state functional connectivity: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
EEG-based resting-state functional connectivity (FC) has been widely explored as a prognostic tool in stroke recovery, offering a cost-effective alternative to fMRI. However, it remains unclear whether FC measures are reliable biomarkers for predicting stroke recovery. This systematic review provides a comprehensive overview of existing EEG-based FC measures and their clinical relevance in stroke recovery. Specifically, this study aims to identify the most reliable and predictive FC measures of recovery by examining their relationship with longitudinal changes, clinical outcomes, and neurorehabilitation protocols. Results show that while some studies report associations between FC and recovery, no consistent patterns emerge. Significant methodological heterogeneity, such as differences in sensor- vs. source-level analysis, study design, connectivity measures, and reliance on correlational rather than predictive approach, limits the interpretability and comparability of results. Overall, these inconsistencies raise concerns about the reliability of EEG-based FC measures as biomarkers of stroke recovery. Moreover, while most studies focused on motor recovery, emerging evidence suggests FC may also help predict cognitive recovery. Future research should prioritize predictive models tailored to clinical needs, explore multidimensional recovery domains, and establish standardized protocols to enhance methodological consistency. By addressing these challenges and harnessing advanced computational techniques, EEG-based FC holds the potential to transform personalized rehabilitation strategies and optimize outcomes for stroke patients. Given the wide range of analytical scenarios and the absence of a superior method, we propose that a “multiverse” analytical approach could offer valuable insights into the most promising pathways for establishing connectivity as a potential biomarker for stroke recovery.
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.