SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Effectiveness of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation for lower limb rehabilitation in spinal cord injury: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation for motor function and functional independence in patients with spinal cord injury: a systematic review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Pooled it
- Case Report: Efficacy of transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation combined with overground robotic-assisted gait training in chronic incomplete spinal cord injury.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSpinal cord injury (SCI) results in devastating motor and sensory deficits below the level of injury. Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) has emerged as a promising non-invasive neuromodulation technique for improving motor function in individuals with SCI. However, the effectiveness of tSCS for lower limb rehabilitation remains unclear.
objectiveTo systematically review the effectiveness of tSCS for improving lower limb motor function, walking ability, spasticity, and functional independence in individuals with SCI.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) from inception to March 2025. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), non-randomized studies, and case series examining tSCS for lower limb rehabilitation in adults with SCI. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using appropriate tools (Cochrane RoB 2, ROBINS-I, JBI Critical Appraisal Checklist). We used GRADE to assess certainty of evidence.
resultsFrom 2042 identified records, 14 studies (n = 183 participants) met inclusion criteria, including 5 RCTs, 4 non-randomized studies, and 5 case series. Due to substantial clinical and methodological heterogeneity, we conducted a narrative synthesis. The single high-quality RCT (Comino-Suárez 2025) showed significant improvements in Lower Extremity Motor Score (LEMS) at follow-up (MD: 3.37, 95% CI: 0.29-6.46) and 10-meter walk test (10MWT) speed (MD: - 37.51 s, 95% CI: - 72.78 to - 2.23), but no significant effects on 6-minute walk test (6MWT) or spasticity. Most studies reported only mild adverse events (skin irritation, tingling). The certainty of evidence was very low for clinical outcomes and moderate for safety.
conclusionsCurrent evidence suggests tSCS may improve lower limb motor function and walking speed in SCI, with a favorable safety profile. However, the evidence base has significant limitations including small sample sizes, heterogeneous protocols, and methodological concerns. Well-designed, adequately powered RCTs with standardized protocols are urgently needed.
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.