SCI Regeneration MapWhat the world knows about repairing the injured spinal cord

Seven directions of research

A subject this map covers

Functional electrical stimulation

A list of codes kept in this browser. No name, no medical answer and no account — nothing personal is stored and nothing is registered.

Part of: Interfaces and neuroprostheses

What belongs here

Stimulating paralysed muscle to produce movement: grasp, step, cycling, exercise.

What does not belong here, however close it looks

Stimulating the cord, even when it changes movement, is neuromodulation.

What has been looked at

Counted from what the sources catalogue, not from reading the work. It says how much exists and over what span of years — never what any of it found.

  • Registered or indexed as work in people: 2494 records · 1950–2026
  • Indexed as work in animals: 400 records · 1986–2026
  • Indexed as laboratory work: 5 records · 1987–2025
  • The source has not said who or what was studied: 243 records · 1984–2026

    Published in this map

    Catalogue records matching this subject. Publication here does not establish human review, measured results or effectiveness. Open a record to inspect its sources and evidence.

    • An intracortical brain-computer interface combined with implanted functional electrical stimulation restores volitional reaching and grasping movements of the paralysed arm after spinal cord injury.
    • Functional electrical stimulation of upper limb muscles enables performance of functionally meaningful tasks such as drinking and self-feeding after spinal cord injury.
    • Combined epidural electrical and muscle stimulation improves functional reconstruction of spinal sensorimotor circuits after spinal cord injury.

    Found in the scientific sources, not yet checked

    Titles and identifiers as the sources publish them. Nobody here has read these papers, and nothing on this shelf is a result, a recommendation or evidence that anything works. Each line opens the original.

    3142 records

    This grouping is the source's own cataloguing, not a reading of the paper. It says where a record was filed, not what it found.

    The source has not said who or what was studied

    Where this was looked for, and when

    The latest collection walk and the accumulated shelf have different scopes. A zero applies only to that source query and its date window; older records may remain on the shelf. It does not mean no research exists.

    ClinicalTrials.govlatest collection walk returned no recordsasked on 2026-09-29
    Collection window: 2026-09-16 – 2026-09-29
    		matched in this collection walk 0 · accumulated records across collection walks 132 · still to fetch in this walk 0aim: every record matching this question
    Crossrefasked, and it answeredasked on 2026-09-16
    Collection window: all dates before the end date – 2026-09-16
    		matched in this collection walk 2903516 · accumulated records across collection walks 50aim: a sample of the most relevant records. This source ranks a bag of words, so its own total is the size of the corpus that shares some of them, never a set still owed.
    PubMedasked, and it answeredasked on 2026-10-12
    Collection window: 2026-09-17 – 2026-10-12
    		matched in this collection walk 7 · accumulated records across collection walks 3064 · still to fetch in this walk 0aim: every record matching this question
    The question asked
    • ClinicalTrials.gov("functional electrical stimulation" OR "FES cycling" OR "neuromuscular electrical stimulation")
    • Crossrefspinal cord injury functional electrical stimulation FES cycling
    • PubMed("Spinal Cord Injuries"[MeSH Terms] OR "spinal cord injury"[Title/Abstract] OR "spinal cord injuries"[Title/Abstract] OR "spinal cord trauma"[Title/Abstract]) AND ("Electric Stimulation Therapy"[MeSH Terms] OR "functional electrical stimulation"[Title/Abstract] OR "FES cycling"[Title/Abstract] OR "neuromuscular electrical stimulation"[Title/Abstract])

    Subjects next to this one