SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation for motor function and functional independence in patients with spinal cord injury: 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpinal cord injury (SCI) can lead to severe impairments in motor, sensory, and autonomic functions, significantly affecting patients' functional independence and quality of life. Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS), as an emerging non-invasive neuromodulation technique, has shown potential in improving motor function. However, existing studies demonstrate substantial heterogeneity, and its clinical efficacy remains unclear.
objectiveTo systematically evaluate the effects of tSCS on motor function and functional independence in individuals with SCI, and to explore the potential influence of patient characteristics and stimulation parameters on treatment outcomes.
methodsA systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Scopus was conducted from database inception to March 23, 2026. Eligible studies included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized studies, and case series. Methodological quality was assessed using the revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) for RCTs, the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for case series. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence. This review was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD420251106919).
resultsA total of 25 studies (n = 353) were included, comprising 9 RCTs, 10 non-randomized studies, and 6 case series. Due to substantial heterogeneity in study design, patient characteristics, and intervention parameters, a qualitative synthesis was performed. The findings suggest that tSCS may have beneficial effects on upper limb motor function as well as balance and postural control. However, no consistent or stable improvements were observed in lower limb motor function, walking ability, functional independence, spasticity, or quality of life. According to the GRADE assessment, the overall certainty of evidence was very low. In terms of safety, tSCS was well tolerated, with no serious adverse events reported.
conclusionCurrent evidence is insufficient to support the definitive efficacy of tSCS in individuals with SCI. Although potential benefits have been observed in certain functional domains, the robustness of the evidence is limited by small sample sizes, methodological limitations, and substantial heterogeneity across studies. High-quality randomized controlled trials are needed to further establish its clinical effectiveness.
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.