Biomedical Technologies for Neurological Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Neurological disorders significantly contribute to global disability, affecting motor, cognitive, and sensory functions. Traditional rehabilitation approaches have limitations in accessibility and intensity, necessitating the integration of biomedical technologies to enhance recovery and daily functioning. Assistive and rehabilitative technologies, including wearable devices, robotic systems, neuromuscular stimulation, and virtual reality, have demonstrated potential in compensating for impairments and improving quality of life. This review provides a comprehensive analysis of biomedical innovations targeting common neurological deficits, offering insights into their applicability across different impairments. Objective: This systematic review evaluates biomedical technologies used for rehabilitation and compensation of neurological impairments, focusing on their effectiveness in improving mobility, cognition, and sensory function. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Scopus, covering studies published between 2009 and 2020. Two independent searches identified neurological impairments and relevant biomedical technologies. Inclusion criteria were studies on adults with neurological deficits, investigating technological interventions for rehabilitation or compensation. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and PEDro scale were used for quality assessment, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool evaluated potential study bias. Results: The review identified 53 neurological impairments, categorized as motor (n=20), cognitive/behavioral (n=15), sensory (n=9), and uncategorized (n=9). The most prevalent impairments included memory loss (n=14), attention deficits (n=9), executive dysfunction (n=10), gait abnormalities (n=7), paralysis/paresis (n=8), hypertonia (n=5), dystonia (n=5), and visual (n=8) or hearing impairments (n=4). A total of 22 biomedical technologies were identified, including brain-computer interfaces, exoskeletons, electrical stimulation, virtual reality, augmented reality, robotic devices, feedback systems, and assistive tools such as GPS locators and prompting systems. Conclusion: Biomedical technologies offer significant potential in neurological rehabilitation by enhancing functional recovery and daily independence. Their effectiveness is influenced by patient-specific needs, environmental contexts, and technology usability. Future research should focus on optimizing these innovations for broader clinical application and long-term efficacy.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.211 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".