Haptic Simulation: Tactile Mechanisms, Restoration and Medical

Applications

Yifei He

Northeastern University, Shenyang, Liaoning Province, 110819, China

Keywords: Haptic Simulation, Intracortical Microstimulation, Sensory Restoration.

Abstract: This paper mainly focuses on three sections: tactile capture, tactile restoration, and medical potential

evaluation. It reviews the research progress of haptic simulation technology in the field of neuroscience,

focusing on the mechanisms of tactile capture and restoration based on intracortical microelectrode arrays.

Studies have shown that by integrating functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and

magnetoencephalography (MEG) technologies, the neural pathways and brain functional areas involved in

tactile perception can be precisely captured. During tactile restoration, microelectrode arrays demonstrate

higher accuracy compared to deep brain stimulation (DBS), especially in tasks requiring fine tactile

perception, enabling subjects to experience natural tactile feedback. Furthermore, multimodal stimulation

integration in the brain significantly enhances the effectiveness of tactile restoration. This technology has

important applications in the rehabilitation of amputees and spinal cord injury patients, as well as in the

treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. Future research should focus on improving the design of

microelectrode arrays to enhance the precision and naturalness of haptic simulation and explore their

integration with artificial intelligence technologies.

1 INTRODUCTION

Haptic simulation technology enhances users'

perception of the external environment by integrating

sensors and visual stimuli. Prosthetic limbs help

amputees regain partial mobility but fall short of

replicating the tactile feedback of natural limbs.

In psychophysical experiments, researchers found

that by stimulating the skin while simultaneously

providing visual stimuli, patients could almost

completely restore their sense of touch (Schultz,

Marasco, & Kuiken, 2009). The core of this discovery

lies in "tricking" the brain into believing the missing

limb still exists, enabling users to operate prosthetics

with the brain's assistance.

Skin electrical stimulation therapy involves

adjusting the frequency and amplitude of electrical

stimulation at the afferent nerve interface and

stimulating the residual nerves connected to the

missing limb to restore prosthetic sensation. A widely

used technique in this therapy is transcutaneous

electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), which targets

peripheral sensory nerves. Normally, the brain

receives signals of touch through afferent nerves.

However, when the residual skin of amputees is

stimulated, these signals can "bypass" the traditional

afferent nerve pathways, allowing amputees to regain

non-corporeal perception (Christie et al., 2017).

Another approach is electrical stimulation of the

brain and spinal cord. Through cortical stimulation,

volunteers have been able to control robotic arms and

achieve very simple pain reflexes (Muheim et al.,

2024). This technique not only benefits prosthetic

operation but also shows progress in treating

neurological diseases such as epilepsy. Compared to

the brain, the spinal cord's simpler distribution

structure makes it easier to operate. Spinal cord

stimulation is more suited for lower-limb amputees,

but its sensitivity to somatosensory resolution

remains a challenge (Kruger, Sininoff, & Witkovsky,

1961).

Currently, electrical stimulation technology offers

promising solutions for both upper and lower limbs.

While progress in temperature and pain perception is

nearing maturity, tactile feedback has yet to reach

natural levels. Scientists are currently employing

hybrid strategies of bionic frequency modulation and

amplitude modulation to enhance the natural

perception of prosthetics (Valle, 2022). Bionic

frequency modulation provides a more natural tactile

experience, while amplitude modulation is more

He, Y.

Haptic Simulation: Tactile Mechanisms, Restoration and Medical Applications.

DOI: 10.5220/0014299600004933

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Food Science (BEFS 2025), pages 21-26

ISBN: 978-989-758-789-4

effective in tasks requiring fine recognition (Valle,

2022).

This paper focuses on the mechanisms of

generating sensation through intracortical

microelectrode arrays, with an emphasis on their

impact on amputees. Microelectrode arrays regulate

abnormal neural circuits in the brain, offering new

therapeutic pathways for patients who have lost

sensation and those with neurodegenerative

diseases.

2 TACTILE CAPTURE

2.1 Methods for Tactile Capture

Before microelectrode array experiments, fixed-

frequency oscillatory stimuli are typically applied to

the subject's limbs while functional magnetic

resonance imaging (fMRI) or

magnetoencephalography (MEG) is used to capture

the subject's tactile perception map. This ensures

precise stimulation and avoids individual differences

(Swan, Gasperson, Krucoff, Grill, & Turner, 2018;

John, 2024; Rickard, 2000; Martijn, van den Heuvel,

Hilleke, & Hulshoff Pol, 2010). This paper primarily

outlines fMRI-based tactile capture processes in

humans.

2.2 Data Collection

Some researchers set EPI scan parameters to multiple

axial slices (approximately 20 slices), with a slice

thickness of about 5 mm and a matrix resolution of 64

× 64 (Rickard, 2000; Cox, & Savoy, 2003).

Anatomical images are obtained using T1-weighted

3D SPGR image acquisition (Rickard, 2000).

2.3 Subjects with Perceptual

Impairments

During the generation of tactile experiences, the brain

integrates tactile stimuli with inputs from other

senses, such as visual stimuli. When individuals

observe their own body parts, tactile stimuli activate

the premotor cortex and intraparietal sulcus, resulting

in the tactile-visual enhancement effect (VET) (Swan,

et al. 2018; Andrea, & Patrick, 2010). Based on VET,

scientists collect data by guiding subjects who cannot

directly perceive tactile sensations through touch to

imagine touch while simultaneously providing visual

stimuli (John, 2024).

2.4 Data Processing and Visualization

fMRI data processing methods include Independent

Component Analysis (ICA), clustering analysis,

large-scale network identification (LSNI), and seed-

based analysis (Martijn et al., 2010; Cox, & Savoy,

2003). The LSNI method can identify functional

networks in about 30% of the cortex (Cox, & Savoy,

2003). Researchers first use MCFLIRT for motion

correction and BET to remove non-brain tissue

(John, 2024). Subsequently, constrained volume-to-

surface mapping methods project fMRI data onto the

pial and white matter surfaces for reconstruction

(John, 2024). By calculating z-scores of upper and

lateral cortical areas and setting minimum z-

thresholds, the distance to S1 can be further

calculated for precise functional area localization

(John, 2024).

2.5 Partial Results of Tactile Capture

Tactile sensations can be classified into three main

categories: mechanical perception, thermal

perception (cold and hot), and pain perception

(Huang & Wu, 2021).

2.6 Mechanical Perception

In touch triggered by mechanoreceptors, the

processing of tactile forms and positions exhibits

hemispheric dominance (Van et al., 2005). In GO and

GL tasks, the left intraparietal sulcus (IPS) processes

tactile forms, while the right temporoparietal junction

(TPJ) processes tactile spatial localization (Van

Boven et al., 2005). The secondary somatosensory

cortex (SII) is the neural basis for learning roughness

and pressure information (Harris, Harris, & Diamond,

2001).

2.7 Thermal Perception

Pathways include the thalamus, primary

somatosensory cortex, anterior cingulate cortex

(ACC), orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), and precuneus

(Xiu et al., 2014).

2.8 Pain Perception

Pain perception is regulated by the medial pain

system, with the ACC being a key structure involved

in generating pain experiences and processing pain-

related emotions and motivation (Xiu et al., 2014).

BEFS 2025 - International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Food Science

2.9 Multisensory Integration

Under multisensory stimulation, enhanced BOLD

signals are observed in multiple brain regions,

including the left ventral and dorsal premotor

cortices, left anterior intraparietal sulcus, left inferior

parietal cortex, left postcentral sulcus, left insula, and

bilateral parietal operculum (Swan et al., 2018).

Subcortical structures involved in multisensory

integration include the left putamen, left thalamus,

and right cerebellum (Swan et al., 2018). These

regions are highly interconnected anatomically,

forming the basis for multisensory integration (Swan

et al., 2018).

2.10 Tactile Classification and Decision-

Making

Tactile classification and decision-making are

regulated by different functional subdivisions of the

supramarginal gyrus (SMG) in the parietal lobe (Lee,

Chung, Kim, & Ryun, 2023). Tactile classification is

influenced by PFt stimulation (rostral SMG), while

decision-making is influenced by PF stimulation

(caudal SMG) (Lee et al., 2023).

3 TACTILE RESTORATION

3.1 Successful Methods for Tactile

Restoration

Due to the VET effect, limbs or prosthetics that

cannot perceive touch are typically touched during

brain stimulation to provide visual stimuli

concurrently (Swan et al., 2018; Andrea, & Patrick,

2010). Tactile restoration can be achieved using

microelectrode arrays and deep brain stimulation

(DBS). Compared to DBS, which is suitable for

broader brain region stimulation (eg.Parkinson's

disease treatment) and uses monopolar configurations

(Swan et al., 2018). Microelectrode arrays are better

suited for fine tactile perception and neural repair

tasks, employing bipolar configurations (Swan et al.,

2018). This paper focuses on tactile restoration using

bipolar-configured microelectrode arrays.

3.2 Implantation Method

In related surgeries, the initial stimulation signal

trajectory is typically mapped while the patient is

awake (Swan et al., 2018). Commonly targeted

locations are 2 – 3 mm posterior to the planned

ventral intermediate nucleus (VIM) treatment

trajectory, close to the visual cortex (VC) and sensory

thalamus (Swan et al., 2018; Downey et al., 2024).

Individual tactile capture results can influence these

implantation locations. Additionally, tapered

electrode arrays are recommended due to their

significantly lower risk of cellular damage compared

to blunt or angled arrays (McNamara et al., 2024).

3.3 Bipolar Configuration Stimulation

Signal Mode

Most experiments use asymmetric bidirectional pulse

sequences (BPS) (Swan et al., 2018; İsmail, Sevgi, &

Burak, 2021). BPS consists of two currents or voltage

pulses opposite in polarity, typically alternating

between a positive and negative pulse. This design

effectively reduces DC bias, minimizing the risks of

tissue damage.

3.4 Bipolar Configuration Stimulation

Signal Duration

The stimulation signal duration is typically greater

than 500 milliseconds, as the minimum time required

to activate specific neurons is generally around this

threshold (Libet et al., 1991). Longer stimulation

ensures the successful activation of neurons and

provides more precise sensory feedback for

subjects (Libet et al., 1991).

3.5 Bipolar Configuration Stimulation

Signal Frequency

Frequency modulation is primarily associated with

the roughness of perceived textures and the number

of neurons activated within the cortical volume

(Greenspon et al., 2024). In human studies,

stimulation at a constant frequency of 100 Hz to 300

Hz typically results in sensations of light touch,

pressure, or mild pricking without triggering

vibratory sensations (Swan et al., 2018). For vibration

perception, frequencies below 100 Hz are usually

selected. For example, studies on rats have shown 40

Hz stimulation induces vibratory effects (İsmail et al.,

2021; Öztürk, Devecioğlu, & Güçlü, 2023).

3.6 Bipolar Configuration Stimulation

Signal Amplitude

Amplitude modulation correlates with the perceived

pressure intensity and the cortical volume activated

(Greenspon et al., 2024). In human experiments,

Haptic Simulation: Tactile Mechanisms, Restoration and Medical Applications

when the current amplitude is set between 25–75 μ

A, participants generally report sensations of light

touch, pressure, or mild pricking (Swan et al., 2018).

Increasing the current incrementally can enhance the

sensation's intensity and potentially induce pain when

thresholds are exceeded.

3.7 Location and Size of the Perceived

Sensation

The sensation area triggered by different electrodes

and participants varies significantly (Greenspon et al.,

2024). Existing data show that the average sensory

area induced by a single wire for participants is

approximately 14 cm², ranging from 1 cm² to 120

cm² (Swan et al., 2018).

3.8 Processing of Tactile Restoration

Results

3.8.1 Statistical analysis

Data variability is represented by standard error (SE),

and differences in task accuracy, task types, and test

modes are analyzed using two-tailed t-tests (Van

Boven et al., 2005). Researchers adjust significance

levels based on the number of comparisons (eg.some

set α to 0.05) and use Bonferroni correction

methods to control experimental error rates while

reporting differences at p < 0.005 (Van Boven et al.,

2005; Harris et al., 2001).

3.8.2 Quantitative and qualitative analysis

Behavioral data collected during experiments are

analyzed using mixed-effects models, considering the

task as a fixed factor and participants as random

factors (Swan et al., 2018). Quantitative analyses

record the size of the sensory area and classify the

distribution of sensation. Qualitative analyses

categorize sensory qualities based on patient

descriptions into natural pressure, touch, pricking,

and vibration (Swan et al., 2018). Additionally, the

effects of various stimulation modes (eg. constant

frequency, increasing frequency ramp, decreasing

frequency ramp, vibration modes) on the perceived

naturalness of the sensations are compared (Swan et

al., 2018; Öztürk et al., 2023).

4 EVALUATION OF MEDICAL

AND REHABILITATION

APPLICATIONS

4.1 Associated Technologies

4.1.1 Tactile Bionics Technology

To simulate natural tactile feedback, scientists have

proposed bionic designs, including bionic frequency

modulation and amplitude modulation (Valle, 2022).

Specific signal details have been discussed

previously. Experiments demonstrate that tactile

bionic feedback induced by intracortical

microstimulation aligns with the sensorimotor loop,

improving the grasping ability of patients with severe

sensory loss (Swan et al., 2018; Flesher et al., 2021).

Additionally, cortical electrical stimulation

enables volunteers to control robotic arms, achieving

basic pain reflexes (Muheim et al., 2024). Compared

to traditional tactile creation methods (eg. rubber

hand illusion via touch), computer-stimulated "rubber

hand" illusions occur in shorter durations, presenting

additional challenges for tactile restoration (Collins et

al., 2017).

4.1.2 Tactile-Assisted Recognition

Technology

Dynamic tactile feedback systems rely on computer

vision to identify the characteristics of the touched

object. Bionic tactile sensors trained with absolute

fluid pressure, dynamic fluid pressure, temperature,

and thermal flux can differentiate various materials,

including frequencies ranging from 0 – 140 Hz

(Huang, & Wu, 2021). Hershey lens, an AI camera

module, has been used to learn and identify colors,

facial features, and objects (Wang, Patnik, Wong,

Wong, & Wong, 2018). Future applications anticipate

observing tactile patterns and offering more

intelligent tactile recognition systems.

4.2 Treatment of Related Diseases

4.2.1 Patients with Sensory Loss

Amputees lose limbs and often experience phantom

limb pain. Through the VET effect, the brain can be

tricked into perceiving the presence of limbs, creating

an illusion of still having the missing body part (Swan

et al., 2018; Andrea, & Patrick, 2010). While TENS

is widely used to enhance tactile perception in

amputees, intracortical microelectrode stimulation

BEFS 2025 - International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Food Science

offers more precise and robust features. For spinal

cord injury and paralysis patients, electrical

stimulation of tactile-related regions in the brain

using microelectrode arrays can activate residual

neural pathways, restoring partial sensory functions

(Kruger et al., 1961). Pain resulting from phantom

limb sensations or spinal cord injuries can also be

alleviated using brain-computer interface (BCI)

technologies, which have demonstrated successful

pain mitigation effects (Yanagisawa et al., 2020;

Yoshida, Hashimoto, Shikota, & Ota, 2016).

4.2.2 Patients with Neurodegenerative

Diseases

Neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's

Disease (AD) are often accompanied by progressive

loss of cognitive and sensory functions (Toh,

Yolland, Gurvich, Barnes, & Rossell, 2023).

Researchers have successfully mitigated disease

severity in AD mouse models through gentle massage

of the fingers or brushing with soft brushes, using

protocols such as three times daily for 15 minutes

over 15 days (Hossain, Karem, Jafari, Kolb, &

Mohajerani, 2023; Hossain, Karem, Jafari, Kolb, &

Mohajerani, 2023). Notably, tactile stimulation for

newborns carrying relevant genes yielded better

results (Hossain et al. 2023).

For Parkinson ’ s Disease (PD), perceptual

disturbances often impair recognition ability. Tactile

illusions may further reduce patients ’

differentiation ability (Toh et al., 2023). Scientists

have addressed freezing of gait (FOG) in PD patients

by deploying vibrating socks to provide tactile hints,

alleviating symptoms (Brodie et al., 2023). While

DBS remains widely used for neurodegenerative

disease treatment, brain microelectrode stimulation

offers stronger and more precise effects. Tactile

stimulation introduced by microelectrode arrays

holds promise as an auxiliary therapy for

neurodegenerative diseases in the future.

5 CONCLUSION

Haptic simulation, by combining sensors, visual

stimuli, and electrical stimulation technologies, offers

possibilities for restoring tactile sensations in patients

who have lost sensation. In tactile capture,

researchers integrate fMRI and MEG technologies for

localization and employ methods like Independent

Component Analysis and seed-based analysis for

further study. Tactile restoration relies primarily on

microelectrode arrays for fine tactile perception and

incorporates multimodal input through the VET

effect.

The advantage of microelectrode arrays lies in

their higher suitability compared to DBS for

achieving fine tactile perception tasks, and their

bipolar stimulation configuration effectively reduces

risks of tissue damage. By frequency and amplitude

modulation, experimental participants perceive

natural touch, pressure, and mild pricking sensations.

The integration of haptic simulation with brain

microelectrode arrays has demonstrated broad

application prospects in the treatment of amputees,

spinal cord injury patients, paralysis patients, and

neurodegenerative disease patients.

In terms of implementation difficulty, the

technology requires invasive surgical implantation of

microelectrode arrays in patients while awake. The

large variability among individuals also presents

challenges to standardization. Future research should

focus on further optimizing microelectrode array

designs to improve precision and naturalness of

tactile restoration. The integration of AI and

neuroscience holds immense potential for the future

of tactile simulation technology.

REFERENCES

Andrea, S., & Patrick, H. 2010. Touch and the body.

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 34(2), 224-

236.

Brodie, M. A., Pelicioni, P. H., Okubo, Y., Chan, D. Y.,

Carroll, V., Toson, B., Vigano, D., Macagno, M.,

Sternberg, S., Schreier, G., & Lovell, N. H. 2023.

Immediate effects of lower limb sensory simulation

using smart socks to stabilize gait in people with

Parkinson's disease. Annual International Conference

of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology

Society, 2023, 1–4.

Christie, B. P., Freeberg, M., Memberg, W. D., Pinault, G.

J. C., Hoyen, H. A., Tyler, D. J., & Triolo, R. J. 2017.

Long-term stability of stimulating spiral nerve cuff

electrodes on human peripheral nerves. Journal of

Neuroengineering and Rehabilitation, 14(1), 70.

Collins, K. L., Guterstam, A., Cronin, J., Olson, J. D.,

Ehrsson, H. H., & Ojemann, J. G. 2017. Ownership of

an artificial limb induced by electrical brain

stimulation. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences, 114(1), 166–171.

Cox, D. D., & Savoy, R. L. 2003. Functional magnetic

resonance imaging (fMRI) "brain reading": Detecting

and classifying distributed patterns of fMRI activity in

human visual cortex. NeuroImage, 19(2 Pt 1), 261-270.

Downey, J. E., Schone, H. R., Foldes, S. T., Greenspon, C.,

Liu, F., Verbaarschot, C., Biro, D., Satzer, D., Moon, C.

H., Coffman, B. A., Youssofzadeh, V., Fields, D.,

Hobbs, T. G., Okorokova, E., Tyler-Kabara, E. C.,

Haptic Simulation: Tactile Mechanisms, Restoration and Medical Applications

Warnke, P. C., Gonzalez-Martinez, J., Hatsopoulos, N.

G., Bensmaia, S. J., Boninger, M. L., Gaunt, R. A., &

Collinger, J. L. 2024. A roadmap for implanting

microelectrode arrays to evoke tactile sensations

through intracortical microstimulation. medRxiv.

Flesher, S. N., Downey, J. E., Weiss, J. M., Hughes, C. L.,

Herrera, A. J., Tyler-Kabara, E. C., Boninger, M. L.,

Collinger, J. L., & Gaunt, R. A. 2021. A brain-computer

interface that evokes tactile sensations improves robotic

arm control. Science, 372(6544), 831–836.

Greenspon, C. M., Valle, G., Shelchkova, N. D., Hobbs, T.

G., Verbaarschot, C., et al. 2024. Evoking stable and

precise tactile sensations via multi-electrode

intracortical microstimulation of the somatosensory

cortex. Nature Biomedical Engineering.

Harris, J. A., Harris, I. M., & Diamond, M. E. 2001. The

topography of tactile learning in humans. Journal of

Neuroscience, 21(3), 1056-1061.

Hossain, S. R., Karem, H., Jafari, Z., Kolb, B. E., &

Mohajerani, M. H. 2023. Early tactile stimulation

influences the development of Alzheimer's disease in

gestationally stressed APP NL-G-F adult offspring NL-

G-F/NL-G-F mice. Experimental Neurology, 368,

114498.

Hossain, S. R., Karem, H., Jafari, Z., Kolb, B. E., &

Mohajerani, M. H. 2023. Tactile stimulation improves

cognition, motor, and anxiety-like behaviors and

attenuates the Alzheimer's disease pathology in adult

APPNL-G-F/NL-G-F mice. Synapse, 77(2), e22257.

İsmail, D., Sevgi, Ö., & Burak, G. 2021. Intracortical

microstimulation for tactile feedback in awake

behaving rats. In B. Güçlü (Ed.), Somatosensory

Feedback for Neuroprosthetics (pp. 379-411).

Academic Press.

Kruger, L., Siminoff, R., & Witkovsky, P. 1961. Single

neuron analysis of dorsal column nuclei and spinal

nucleus of trigeminal in cat. Journal of

Neurophysiology, 24(4), 333-349.

Lee, D. H., Chung, C. K., Kim, J. S., & Ryun, S. 2024.

Unraveling tactile categorization and decision-making

in the subregions of supramarginal gyrus via direct

cortical stimulation. Clinical Neurophysiology, 158,

16-26.

Libet, B., Pearl, D. K., Morledge, D. E., Gleason, C. A.,

Hosobuchi, Y., & Barbaro, N. M. 1991. Control of the

transition from sensory detection to sensory awareness

in man by the duration of a thalamic stimulus. Brain,

114(4), 1731-1757.

McNamara, I. N., Wellman, S. M., Li, L., Eles, J. R., Savya,

S., Sohal, H. S., Angle, M. R., & Kozai, T. D. Y. 2024.

Electrode sharpness and insertion speed reduce tissue

damage near high-density penetrating arrays. Journal of

Neural Engineering, 21(2).

Muheim, J., Iberite, F., Akouissi, O., Monney, R.,

Morosato, F., Gruppioni, E., Micera, S., & Shokur, S.

2024. A sensory-motor hand prosthesis with integrated

thermal feedback. Med, 5(2), 118-125.e5.

Öztürk, S., Devecioğlu, İ., & Güçlü, B. 2023. Bayesian

prediction of psychophysical detection responses from

spike activity in the rat sensorimotor cortex. Journal of

Computational Neuroscience, 51(2), 207–222.

Rickard, T. C., Romero, S. G., Basso, G., Wharton, C.,

Flitman, S., & Grafman, J. 2000. The calculating brain:

An fMRI study. Neuropsychologia, 38(3), 325-335.

Swan, B. D., Gasperson, L. B., Krucoff, M. O., Grill, W.

M., & Turner, D. A. 2018. Sensory percepts induced by

microwire array and DBS microstimulation in human

sensory thalamus. Brain Stimulation, 11(2), 416-422.

Toh, W. L., Yolland, C., Gurvich, C., Barnes, J., & Rossell,

S. L. 2023. Non-visual hallucinations in Parkinson's

disease: A systematic review. Journal of Neurology,

270(6), 2857–2889.

Valle, G. 2022. Peripheral neurostimulation for encoding

artificial somatosensations. European Journal of

Neuroscience, 56(10), 5888-5901.

Van Boven, R. W., Ingeholm, J. E., Beauchamp, M. S.,

Bikle, P. C., & Ungerleider, L. G. 2005. Tactile form

and location processing in the human brain.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,

102(35), 12601-12605.

Wang, L., Patnik, A., Wong, E., Wong, J., & Wong, A.

2018. OLIV: An artificial intelligence-powered

assistant for object localization for impaired vision.

Journal of Computational Vision and Imaging Systems,

4(1), 3.

Yanagisawa, T., Fukuma, R., Seymour, B., Tanaka, M.,

Hosomi, K., Yamashita, O., Kishima, H., Kamitani, Y.,

& Saitoh, Y. 2020. BCI training to move a virtual hand

reduces phantom limb pain: A randomized crossover

trial. Neurology, 95(4), e417–e426.

Yoshida, N., Hashimoto, Y., Shikota, M., & Ota, T. 2016.

Relief of neuropathic pain after spinal cord injury by

brain-computer interface training. Spinal Cord Series

and Cases, 2, 16021.

BEFS 2025 - International Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Food Science