ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2026
Therapy-specific motoneuron activation with epidural and dorsal root ganglion stimulation in spinal cord injury.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 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
14 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past decade, there has been a remarkable increase in the number of clinical trials using electrical spinal cord stimulation to alleviate sensorimotor dysfunctions caused by traumatic spinal cord injury (SCI). Interestingly, despite using different stimulation modalities across studies, such as epidural stimulation (ES) or dorsal root ganglia stimulation (DRGS), similar motor outcomes have been achieved, and in turn, strengthened momentum to translate spinal stimulation as a robust clinical tool for SCI rehabilitation. To investigate how spinal stimulation affects motor outcomes, surface electromyography is used to assess muscle activity in response to specific stimulation parameters (e.g., frequency, amplitude) and contact configurations. We characterized lower extremity evoked responses produced by ES and DRGS in 19 clinical trial participants with traumatic SCI. Our results showed that at threshold intensity, ES demonstrated bias for activating distal muscles whereas DRGS preferentially activated proximal muscles ipsilateral to the stimulation electrode. Following paired stimulation pulses spaced 50 ms apart, suppression of the second pulse response was observed in both modalities for all participants, while more pronounced suppression was observed with ES compared with DRGS. DRGS-evoked electromyography (EMG) response latencies were shorter compared with ES-evoked EMG response across proximal leg muscles. Altogether, these results demonstrate that ES and DRGS activate motoneurons projecting to lower extremity muscles through distinct yet overlapping mechanisms. These electrophysiological signatures are unique to each stimulation modality and may guide individually tailored therapies to improve task-specific lower extremity motor function.
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.