ReviewFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2026
Decision-centered wearable biosensors for personalized rehabilitation: integrating multimodal monitoring, artificial intelligence, and closed-loop intervention.
Review in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Personalized rehabilitation requires repeated assessment of movement, physiological tolerance, fatigue, and adherence, yet conventional clinic-based measurements provide only intermittent snapshots. The convergence of wearable biosensors with artificial intelligence, edge-cloud computing, and connected data infrastructures creates an opportunity to convert continuous multimodal signals into timely rehabilitation decisions. This critical narrative review synthesizes physiological, biochemical, electrophysiological, biomechanical, and behavioral sensing within a monitoring-interpretation-feedback-adaptation-outcome framework. We first evaluate analytical validity, real-world robustness, biocompatibility, wearability, calibration drift, and power continuity. We then examine signal-quality control, multimodal fusion, digital biomarkers, federated learning, digital twins, and predictive models according to latency, uncertainty, generalizability, privacy, and decision utility. The review follows biosensor-derived information across a graded spectrum of action, from clinician-reviewed monitoring and real-time biofeedback to assist-as-needed adaptation, functional electrical stimulation, and state-responsive neuromodulation. Applications include motor and physiological assessment, fatigue-aware dose adjustment, musculoskeletal and neurological rehabilitation, posture correction, sensor-rich prosthetics, and Internet of Things-enabled home rehabilitation. Across these settings, greater autonomy increases the evidence and safety requirements: models should expose confidence, systems should degrade safely when signal quality falls, and digital infrastructures should preserve interoperability, version traceability, privacy, and accountable clinician oversight. The central translational gap is not sensor sensitivity alone but whether an integrated biosensor system produces a reliable metric, supports an explicit and proportionate decision, and improves an outcome important to the patient. Decision-centered evaluation can help move wearable biosensing from fragmented technology demonstrations toward secure, personalized, continuous, and clinically accountable rehabilitation.
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.