On the use of sham transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation in spinal cord injury clinical trials
Authors:
Open Access
- 4 February 2025
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in Brain
- Vol. 148 (5) , 1456-1458
Abstract
Kramer et al. examine the reasons put forth by investigators for excluding a sham condition in trials of neuromodulation therapies for individuals with spinal cord injury. They conclude that current dogma does not justify this design, and emphasize the need for future trials to include appropriate controls.Keywords
Funding Information
- Government of Canada (NFRF, NFRFT-2020-00238)
- University of British Columbia
- North Family Foundation
This publication has 10 references indexed in Scilit:
- Next-gen spinal cord injury clinical trials: lessons learned and opportunities for future successEBioMedicine, 2024
- Non-invasive spinal cord electrical stimulation for arm and hand function in chronic tetraplegia: a safety and efficacy trialNature Medicine, 2024
- Soluble Nogo-Receptor-Fc decoy (AXER-204) in patients with chronic cervical spinal cord injury in the USA: a first-in-human and randomised clinical trialThe Lancet Neurology, 2023
- Self-Assisted Standing Enabled by Non-Invasive Spinal Stimulation after Spinal Cord InjuryJournal of Neurotrauma, 2019
- Daily intermittent hypoxia enhances walking after chronic spinal cord injuryNeurology, 2014
- The ethics of placebo-controlled trials: Methodological justificationsContemporary Clinical Trials, 2013
- Sham transcranial magnetic stimulation using electrical stimulation of the scalpBrain Stimulation, 2009
- Position statement on the sale of unproven cellular therapies for spinal cord injury The International Campaign for Cures of Spinal Cord Injury ParalysisSpinal Cord, 2009
- Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literatureJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2007
- Placebo Effects in OncologyJNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2003