ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2026
Robotic-Assisted Rehabilitation and Spinal Neuromodulation After Spinal Cord Injury: From Mechanisms to Trial-Informed Practice.
Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is an acute, devastating neurologic condition that results in permanent progressive motor deficits, sensory disturbances, and autonomic dysfunctions, which limit function, participation, and quality of life. Although substantial progress has been made during the last several decades for both early trauma care and rehabilitation protocols following SCI, long-term neurological recovery remains unpredictable and often incomplete. This manuscript summarizes mechanistic and clinical evidence regarding robotic-assisted rehabilitation (RAR) and spinal neuromodulation (SN), which have been published since 2010 until the present time in a structured narrative review of the literature on these two emerging areas for neurorehabilitation after SCI. RAR provides high-intensity, task-specific training that consistently results in improvements in functional outcomes such as balance, coordination, and independence; however, its impact is limited when it comes to walking speed or voluntary motor control. SN (particularly epidural stimulation) can activate the residual neural pathways to standing up and stepping even after a complete injury but effects are typically stimulus dependent, with heterogeneous clinical results that often lack strong long-term evidence due in part to variability in patient selection, stimulation parameters and rehabilitation protocols. However, there is emerging mechanistic data supporting combining modulation of excitability through SN approaches along with structured sensorimotor training as an approach for enhancing recovery. Collectively, these findings support a shift toward more physiology-driven neurorehabilitation strategies and the need for future research to improve clinical translation and outcome predictability by patient stratification using standardized intervention protocols that include longitudinal evaluation.
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.