MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396652724 · doi:10.1186/s12984-024-01365-2

Exoskeleton-based exercises for overground gait and balance rehabilitation in spinal cord injury: a systematic review of dose and dosage parameters

2024· review· en· W4396652724 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrik Nepomuceno, Wagner Souza Silva, Maureen Pakosh, Kristin E. Musselman, B. Catharine Craven

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersGlobal Affairs CanadaUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network FoundationGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryRehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCINAHLPhysical therapyGaitCardiorespiratory fitnessGait trainingParaplegiaBalance (ability)ExoskeletonSports medicineMEDLINEHydrotherapySpinal cordPsychological interventionAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Exoskeletons are increasingly applied during overground gait and balance rehabilitation following neurological impairment, although optimal parameters for specific indications are yet to be established. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to identify dose and dosage of exoskeleton-based therapy protocols for overground locomotor training in spinal cord injury/disease. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. A literature search was performed using the CINAHL Complete, Embase, Emcare Nursing, Medline ALL, and Web of Science databases. Studies in adults with subacute and/or chronic spinal cord injury/disease were included if they reported (1) dose (e.g., single session duration and total number of sessions) and dosage (e.g., frequency of sessions/week and total duration of intervention) parameters, and (2) at least one gait and/or balance outcome measure. RESULTS: Of 2,108 studies identified, after removing duplicates and filtering for inclusion, 19 were selected and dose, dosage and efficacy were abstracted. Data revealed a great heterogeneity in dose, dosage, and indications, with overall recommendation of 60-min sessions delivered 3 times a week, for 9 weeks in 27 sessions. Specific protocols were also identified for functional restoration (60-min, 3 times a week, for 8 weeks/24 sessions) and cardiorespiratory rehabilitation (60-min, 3 times a week, for 12 weeks/36 sessions). CONCLUSION: This review provides evidence-based best practice recommendations for overground exoskeleton training among individuals with spinal cord injury/disease based on individual therapeutic goals - functional restoration or cardiorespiratory rehabilitation. There is a need for structured exoskeleton clinical translation studies based on standardized methods and common therapeutic outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.032
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.032
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0100.011
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.359 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroEngineering and RehabilitationSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207