NeuralCipher Research overview
The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by
BackgroundStroke, multiple sclerosis (MS), and Parkinson's disease (PD) cause balance and walking impairments, which increase the risk of falls and reduce quality of life. Technological advances have enabled novel reactive balance approaches.ObjectiveTo synthesize the current approaches of technology-based perturbation interventions during walking and their effects on physical function in stroke, MS, and PD.MethodsA literature search was conducted in PubMed, PEDro, and ScienceDirect for studies published from January 2014 to December 2025, supplemented by citation tracking and grey literature. Eligible studies included interventional studies utilizing technology-based perturbation during walking in stroke, MS, or PD.ResultsTen studies were included. Participants were diagnosed with stroke (n = 83, 42%), MS (n = 77, 39%), or PD (n = 38, 19%). Most interventions used treadmill-based perturbations to induce slips, trips, or lateral balance instability. Interventions comprised a median of nine sessions over three weeks (25 min per session). Outcomes were grouped into four categories: clinical assessments, patient-reported outcomes, technology-based assessments, and assessments during walking training. Between-group differences compared to similar treatments without perturbation were inconsistent, but within-group improvements in walking speed, balance, and functional mobility were commonly reported. Adverse events were rare, and safety protocols were followed. Considerable heterogeneity in intervention protocols and outcome measures limited synthesis.ConclusionTechnology-based perturbation training during walking may offer an alternative for improving physical function in stroke, MS, and PD. Evidence of superiority over non-perturbation interventions remains inconclusive due to heterogeneity and small samples. Within-group improvements suggest benefits, warranting standardized protocols and larger high-quality trials.
Scientific assessment
Research question
Assess the question within the original study’s scope.
Methods & sample
Check the source article for study design and sample details.
Key findings
An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.
Limitations
Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.
Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.