Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42678134›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of translational myology2026

Mapping the literature about brain-computer interface in rehabilitation: a graph-theory-based PCA framework for semantic space analysis.

Daniele Coraci, Gianluca Regazzo, Stefano Masiero

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of translational myology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Daniele CoraciSection of Rehabilitation, Department of Neuroscience-DNS, University of Padova.ORCID 0000-0002-7019-9006
Gianluca RegazzoSection of Rehabilitation, Department of Neuroscience-DNS, University of Padova.ORCID 0009-0004-6277-4199
Stefano MasieroSection of Rehabilitation, Department of Neuroscience-DNS, University of Padova.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Brain-Computer Interfaces (BCIs) are increasingly used in neurorehabilitation, but the rapid expansion of scientific literature complicates the identification of clinically relevant studies. This study investigated whether expert-defined relevance within BCI rehabilitation literature emerges as a structural property of semantic networks through the integration of graph theory and Principal Component Analysis (PCA). A Lexical Network Analysis Based on Graph Theory (LENGTH) was applied to randomized controlled trials indexed in PubMed over the last decade using the query "brain computer interface" AND rehabilitation. Titles and abstracts were analyzed to construct a semantic network linking articles and lexical terms. Multiple graph-theoretical metrics were calculated and residualized against weighted degree to minimize document-size bias. PCA was subsequently applied to the residualized metrics. Forty-eight studies were included. The network showed a compact and highly interconnected structure, centered on motor and functional recovery concepts. PCA identified two principal components explaining of total variance. Relevant articles tended to occupy regions characterized by higher semantic integration and lower hierarchical influence. Although no clear categorical separation emerged, a consistent positional tendency was observed. These findings suggest that relevance may be represented as a topological property within a multidimensional semantic landscape, supporting the use of semantic-network approaches for literature screening and evidence synthesis.

Indexed as

Brain-computer interfacegraph theorynetwork analysisneurorehabilitationprincipal component analysis

Identifiers

PMID42678134
PMCPMC13688305

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.