ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Neuromodulatory effects of voluntary-motor-effort-driven wrist-hand robot in sensorimotor dynamics after stroke.
Article 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVoluntary motor effort (VME)-driven neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES)-robots have demonstrated superior rehabilitative efficacy in post-stroke wrist-hand motor restoration compared with purely mechanical systems. However, their neuromodulatory mechanisms remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate cortical responses elicited by an electromyography (EMG)-driven NMES-robot assisting wrist-hand movements in individuals with chronic stroke, and to evaluate robot-nervous system interactions, using EMG to capture VME.
methodsCortical responses during wrist-hand extension were recorded in participants with chronic stroke (n = 18) and unimpaired controls (n = 20) using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). The EMG-driven NMES-robot delivered somatosensory stimulation with different combinations of mechanical stimulation (MS) to the targeted joints and NMES to the forearm muscles, with or without VME.
resultsCombined MS and NMES co-stimulation activated wider cortical areas than MS or NMES alone in both groups. Compared with the unimpaired group, the stroke group exhibited greater ipsilesional activations in response to NMES (p < 0.05), while MS induced comparable activations in the contralateral hemisphere to the stimulated limb in both groups (p < 0.05). When VME was required, the stroke group exhibited wider contralesional involvement with MS only (p < 0.05) but reduced contralesional involvement during sole NMES (p < 0.05), compared to those in the co-stimulation. Additionally, the MS and NMES co-stimulation resulted in similar functional connectivity patterns between the stroke and unimpaired groups.
conclusionCombined mechano-electrical somatosensory co-stimulation with MS and NMES to the affected wrist-hand, when voluntary motor effort is generated from the residual muscles, could elicit extensive cortical activation approaching normal patterns.
trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry with the identifier ChiCTR2200057839.
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.