Trial reportBMC neurology2025
Heart rate variability biofeedback in adults with chronic spinal cord injury: a randomised feasibility study.
Trial report in BMC neurology, 2025. 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
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundHeart rate variability biofeedback (HRV-F) is a neurocardiac self-regulation therapy, that has been shown to improve cardiac autonomic regulation, emotional regulation, and cognitive function in various clinical populations. Despite this, there is little evidence for the benefit of HRV-F in adults with spinal cord injury (SCI).
methodsThis study evaluated the feasibility of conducting a parallel randomised controlled trial (RCT) to evaluate the effectiveness of a 10-week HRV-F intervention for adults with chronic SCI. Individuals with SCI (irrespective of level and completeness), at least 12 months after diagnosis due to any traumatic or non-traumatic and non-progressive cause, and aged between 18 and 70 years of age were eligible to participate. Feasibility was evaluated in terms of six primary outcomes: (i) randomisation and blinding, (ii) participant safety, (iii) recruitment, (iv) retention, (v) adherence to the intervention, and (vi) primary outcome data collection methods (heart rate variability [HRV] and cerebral blood velocity [CBv]). Participants' satisfaction, impression of change, and technological issues were assessed as secondary outcomes.
resultsThe first 10 participants of the RCT (n = 120) were studied in the 10-week feasibility study. No serious adverse events occurred during the study activities (assessment or intervention sessions). While there were no withdrawals and high adherence to the intervention, the recruitment rate was below the target. There were no missing HRV data; however, missing data for CBv was higher than anticipated based on the literature (35% vs. 20%). A few minor connectivity issues occurred with the technology used for home training by participants. Modifications to the RCT protocol, including adjusting the eligibility criteria, recalculating the sample size, conducting interventions in participants' homes, and altering the CBv assessment protocol, were proposed to address these issues.
conclusionsWith the proposed modifications implemented, the RCT is deemed feasible for investigating the effectiveness of a 10-week HRV-F intervention for adults with chronic SCI.
trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12621000870853). Registered on July 6, 2021.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.