Trial reportBMJ open2026
Testing neuromuscular feedback therapy in patients with chronic spinal cord injury with residual motor function in the lower extremities compared to 'conventional' therapy: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial.
Trial report in BMJ open, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designMulticentre randomised controlled trial.
settingEight spinal cord injury (SCI) centres and 15 rehabilitation centres in Germany.
objectivesTo demonstrate the superiority of neuromuscular feedback therapy using an exoskeleton compared to conventional therapy in terms of improving walking ability in patients with chronic SCI.
methodsA total of 180 patients with chronic complete or incomplete SCI and residual motor function in the lower extremities are to be included. Baseline examination will be carried out at the recruiting SCI centres, followed by 1:1 randomisation at the rehabilitation centre allocating patients to the control group (conventional therapy) or the intervention group (Hybrid Assistive Limb therapy). Both interventions take place to the same extent (5×/week, 60 min) over a period of 12 weeks at the rehabilitation centres. After the 12-week intervention phase, the primary (therapy response defined as relevant improvement in at least one of the following: 6 min walk test, 10 m walk test and Walking Index for Spinal Cord Injury II score) and secondary endpoints (quality of life, pain, bladder and bowel function) are recorded by blinded observers at the SCI centres or via patient app. The effects of the intervention will be evaluated in the middle and at the end of the 6-month follow-up period. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study is approved by the ethics committee of the Medical Association of Westphalia-Lippe (register no. 2025-2014 f-S). The participants were informed about the aims and procedures of the study and gave their written consent. This protocol follows the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement. The study results will be published in accordance with the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT), regardless of whether the results are positive or negative. The datasets belong to the Joint Federal Committee of Germany and are available there on request. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: DRKS 00035487.
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.