ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2026
Wearable Technologies for Gait Instability Rehabilitation: Mechanisms, Clinical Evidence, and Future Directions.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 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
Wearable technologies are reshaping gait rehabilitation by shifting assessment and therapy from intermittent, clinic-based observation to continuous, data-driven, and adaptive care. This narrative review synthesizes the biomechanical basis of gait instability, the architecture and classification of wearable rehabilitation systems, and the clinical evidence for motion sensors, smart insoles, biofeedback devices, robotic and orthotic wearables, neuromodulatory systems, immersive platforms, and artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled closed-loop interventions. Its main contribution is an integrated framework that links AI, digital biomarkers, device components, adaptive control, and translational implementation, rather than treating wearable rehabilitation as a device-only or disease-specific topic. Current evidence indicates that these technologies can improve gait speed, symmetry, balance, endurance, fall-risk monitoring, and dual-task performance in neurological, musculoskeletal, frailty-related, and aging populations. However, the field is still limited by heterogeneous protocols, small samples, limited longitudinal validation, insufficient device standardization, usability barriers, cybersecurity concerns, uncertain reimbursement, and restricted interoperability with healthcare systems. Future progress will depend on multimodal sensor fusion, explainable and federated AI, digital twins, adaptive wearable robotics, tele-rehabilitation pathways, and large-scale pragmatic trials that validate effectiveness in real-world rehabilitation settings.
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.