SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
The past, present and future of control architectures in lower-limb cable-driven robots for gait rehabilitation.
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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Due to their high power-to-weight ratio, modular and reconfigurable architectures, and inherent compliance, cable-driven rehabilitation robots (CDRRs) provide safe, lightweight, backdrivable solutions for gait and movement rehabilitation. However, they continue to face unique control challenges due to cable properties and user variability. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this systematic review explores control strategies for lower-limb CDRRs from the past decade. Out of the 968 studies initially identified, 70 met the selection criteria and were classified into six categories: position and velocity, force- and torque-based, compliance-based, model-based and optimal, learning-based and intention-informed, and hierarchical frameworks. Our analysis revealed a chronological evolution from traditional classical control toward more personalized, adaptive, learning-based, and intention-driven methods. Impedance and admittance control remain fundamental for ensuring safety, while newer approaches enable user-specific and environment-responsive assistance. This review proposes a unified hierarchical framework linking high-level intent detection to low-level actuation providing researchers and developers with a structured understanding of the control landscape for cable-driven lower-limb exoskeletons in healthcare and beyond. Control strategies were also linked to clinical outcomes to relate them to functional improvements across patient populations. Advancing CDRRs will require unified, multi-layer architectures that couple constraint-aware model-based control with adaptive and intention-driven learning to achieve safe, scalable, and clinically meaningful rehabilitation.
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.