ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2026
Closed-loop brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke sensorimotor loop restoration.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stroke recovery is increasingly understood as a process shaped by disrupted interactions among motor intention, descending motor output, peripheral movement, and sensory feedback, rather than by motor weakness alone. After stroke, residual motor intention may not be effectively translated into spinal motor output, peripheral movement may be too limited to provide sufficient sensory feedback, and compensatory network recruitment may not always support efficient motor control. Closed-loop brain-computer interfaces offer a mechanistically motivated approach to this problem by detecting motor imagery, motor attempt, or sensorimotor rhythms in real time and translating these signals into contingent functional electrical stimulation, robotic assistance, virtual reality, multisensory feedback, or neuromodulation. By partially restoring the temporal coupling between detected motor intention, assisted or stimulated movement, and sensory feedback, these systems are hypothesized to promote activity-dependent plasticity, reinforce sensorimotor circuits, and modulate distributed motor, sensory, attentional, and interhemispheric networks. In this review, we synthesize the neurobiological basis, recovery mechanisms, implementation strategies, and emerging predictive biomarkers of closed-loop brain-computer interfaces for post-stroke sensorimotor rehabilitation. Although closed-loop brain-computer interfaces show promise for selected patients, treatment effects remain heterogeneous and depend on patient characteristics, decodability of motor-related brain signals, intervention dose, feedback modality, and trial design. Future progress will require mechanism-informed patient stratification, adaptive decoding, individualized feedback, standardized outcomes, and real-world validation.
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.