The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 22 of the 54 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees
Open accessAbstract
Peripheral nerves provide a promising source of motor control signals for neuroprosthetic devices. Unfortunately, the clinical utility of current peripheral nerve interfaces is limited by signal amplitude and stability. Here, we showed that the regenerative peripheral nerve interface (RPNI) serves as a biologically stable bioamplifier of efferent motor action potentials with long-term stability in upper limb amputees. Ultrasound assessments of RPNIs revealed prominent contractions during phantom finger flexion, confirming functional reinnervation of the RPNIs in two patients. The RPNIs in two additional patients produced electromyography signals with large signal-to-noise ratios. Using these RPNI signals, subjects successfully controlled a hand prosthesis in real-time up to 300 days without control algorithm recalibration. RPNIs show potential in enhancing prosthesis control for people with upper limb loss.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
55 Own result · 17 Own interpretation · 10 Partly supported · 7 No basis given · 6 Own method · 5 Supported so far · 5 No full text of the sources · 4 Supported · accuracy not yet measured
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Consequently, implanted amputees can control a limited number of independent movements (11).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [11] source
The Future Advances section (page unavailable) says that even with targeted muscle reinnervation, current control algorithms operate sequentially or control at most two degrees of freedom at once. This supports the claim that the number of independently controllable movements is limited. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“However, current peripheral nerve interfaces have limitations, which minimize their clinical utility (1, 2).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [1] source
- Supportedcites [2] source
The Electrical section (p. 2) says nerve electrodes can damage nerves and that compatibility issues require further study before widespread clinical application. The Disadvantages section (p. 3) lists additional limitations, including surgical complexity and difficulty achieving selective stimulation. These passages support the claim that limitations reduce clinical usefulness. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Electrodes placed around a nerve have been successfully used in humans for improving sensory feedback for more than 2 years.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] source
The Discussion (p. 8) states that results from the peripheral nerve cuff interface were stable for more than two years in subject 1. The Discussion also reports improved functional performance with sensory feedback. The claim is supported for at least one human subject, not both. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The chronic bipolar electrodes used in this study are similar to those that have been previously observed to record stable EMG for up to 7.5 years (23).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [23] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods and Results describe implanted bipolar EMG recording electrodes, and the Discussion says the subjects used implanted EMG electrodes for control. But the 7.5-year observation in the Results and Discussion concerns functioning nerve cuff electrodes, not stable EMG recordings; the copy does not establish that duration for the recording electrodes. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In previous studies, investigators have provided prosthetic control signals by interfacing with intact muscles in the residual limb.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [24] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [26] source
- Supportedcites [27] source
The Introduction states that powered transradial prostheses commonly use EMG signals from forearm muscles to control hand opening and closing. This supports the claim that prosthetic control signals have been obtained by interfacing with muscles in the residual limb. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Supportedcites [28] source
The Introduction describes myoelectric prostheses using signals from residual-limb muscles to control movement and notes existing clinical control methods. Methods §2.1 describes recording from forearm muscles in two amputee subjects. The copy does not provide page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.90)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“To date, pattern recognition controllers have outperformed conventional controllers during standardized functional trials (36).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [36] source
The Results (In Lab Testing with Physical Prosthesis) report significantly better performance with pattern recognition than direct control on the SHAP and Clothespin Relocation Task. These standardized functional tests support the claim; the study involved eight transhumeral amputees with targeted muscle reinnervation. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Previous studies of simultaneous control of multiple DOFs have focused on controlling the wrist and hand open/closed (26, 28, 30).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [26] source
- Supportedcites [28] source
The Introduction describes earlier real-time demonstrations of simultaneous control of two wrist DOFs, with or without a hand DOF. The Methods describe this study’s simultaneous-control task as wrist rotation, wrist flexion/extension, and hand open/close, matching the cited area of work. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Supportedcites [30] source
The Discussion reports simultaneous control of wrist and hand-opening/closing DOFs. The clothespin-task description also identifies simultaneous wrist pronation–supination and hand opening–closing, so this paper is an example of the earlier work described in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“results from previous animal work, which demonstrated that it took approximately 3 months for RPNIs to mature and stabilize (12, 15–17).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > MATERIALS AND METHODS > Electrophysiology
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [15] source
- Partly supportedcites [16] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods (§2.1; page unavailable) say the rats recuperated for four months to allow healing and graft reinnervation, with evaluation during the fourth month. The paper reports that RPNI signal amplitudes did not vary appreciably over the evaluation period (Figure 4 caption; page unavailable), but it does not demonstrate that maturation and stabilization took approximately three months. (LLM, conf=0.84)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Two participants (P1 and P2) with RPNIs created above the elbow (that is, no long flexors or extensors of the fingers or wrist remain) were evaluated with ultrasound, and their RPNIs were observed to contract during phantom finger movements.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaincorrelationaln = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using these RPNI signals, subjects successfully controlled a hand prosthesis in real-time up to 300 days without control algorithm recalibration.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > Abstract
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we show that RPNIs, implanted in participants with upper extremity limb loss, actively produced RPNI muscle contractions during volitional phantom finger movement.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ultrasound assessments of RPNIs revealed prominent contractions during phantom finger flexion, confirming functional reinnervation of the RPNIs in two patients.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > Abstract
boosteddirectn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The RPNIs in two additional patients produced electromyography signals with large signal-to-noise ratios.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > Abstract
plaindirectn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These median nerve RPNIs, identified by ultrasound, demonstrated independent contractions during attempted thumb IP and index finger proximal IP (PIP)/distal IP (DIP) joint flexion of the phantom limb (movie S1).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
boostedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“When the classifier was trained with both RPNI signals and residual muscle signals (see Materials and Methods), we were able to decode four different grasping postures (fig. S3).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the ulnar nerve RPNIs activated for finger abduction/adduction; anatomically, these finger motions are exclusively controlled by the ulnar innervated intrinsic muscles of the hand (Fig. 3, A and B).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In both participants, large amplitude, anatomically appropriate motor control signals were recorded from the indwelling RPNI electrodes (n = 2,3).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With ultrasound guidance, we demonstrated that different subregions of each RPNI contracted for different volitional movements.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“P4’s real-time and simulated thumb position differed by 53.8% during active thumb periods (fig. S4B).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, because of the motion of the surrounding innervated residual muscles, dedicated RPNI movement was difficult to isolate because of the contractions and conformational changes of the adjacent innervated residual muscle.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With surgically implanted indwelling electrodes at the distal transradial level, we have shown that RPNI EMG activation occurred during specific intrinsic hand movements.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The participant used this three DOF control to complete a self-paced box and blocks task (movie S12).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because of the weight, P4 was unable to lift the LUKE hand to complete the functional tasks.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this study, however, we did not observe a change in motor performance in either subject.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During real-time control, P3 was able to control the virtual thumb opposition and flexion, as well as small finger flexion, finger adduction, and resting hand postures with 100% accuracy (Fig. 4A and movie S4).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although surface electrodes recorded smaller amplitude EMG signals than intramuscular electrodes”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The subject successfully and sequentially completed a trio of Southampton Hand Assessment Procedure (SHAP) abstract tasks (movie S12).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“P4 was able to control the ring finger, thumb flexion, small finger, finger abduction, and resting hand postures with 94.3% accuracy (Fig. 4B and movie S5).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As demonstrated during functional tasks, continuous control of three DOFs was achieved by adding residual EMG from the FDPI muscle.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The thumb state vector represents thumb flexion/extension and thumb opposition/reposition position and velocity.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The most promising finding of intrinsic hand functionality was the ability for P3 and P4 to control the intrinsic muscles of their thumb using both their ulnar and median RPNIs.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using a simple naïve Bayes classifier trained with only RPNI signals, we were able to decode five different finger postures in each subject, both offline and in real time (Fig. 4).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNI signal recording specifically identified physiologically correct motions from each of the peripheral nerves in both participants.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, each subject was able to control fist, pinch, point, and extend fingers with 100% accuracy (fig. S3, A and B, and movie S6).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With some variation in amplitude, they contracted during thumb carpometacarpal (CMC)/metacarpophalangeal (MCP)/IP joint flexion, index PIP/DIP joint flexion, and middle, ring, small finger PIP/DIP joint flexion (Fig. 2B and movie S3).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In this study, RPNIs enabled P3 and P4 to have intuitive two-axis thumb control including thumb flexion/extension and thumb opposition/reposition.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The thumb state vector represents thumb flexion/extension and thumb opposition/reposition position and velocity.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The high accuracy of the thumb control seen during the virtual task translated well to the physical prosthesis (movie S11).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a significant difference between the original and simulated trajectories (P < 0.001), which suggests that the RPNI signals played an important role in contributing to the subject’s intentional thumb movement.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
hedgedSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These contractions were associated with minimal movement of the surrounding tissue.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As expected, there was minimal median nerve RPNI signal detection during small finger flexion (Fig. 3, A and B).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ulnar RPNI 2 was more strongly activated during finger abduction/adduction and thumb CMC/MCP joint motion than ulnar RPNI 1 (Fig. 3B).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“On the last day, P3 and P4 were still able to acquire targets with high accuracy, 100 and 96.4%, respectively (Fig. 5, A and B, and movies S7 and S8).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, P3 and P4’s SNRs were substantially larger for RPNIs with implanted bipolar electrodes than measured SNR in nerve cuff electrodes or intraneural probes, whose SNR ranges from 4 to 15 (3, 9, 21, 22).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The normalized average Euclidean distance between P3’s real-time predicted two-dimensional thumb trajectory and simulated two-dimensional thumb position trajectory was 25.5% of the maximum range of motion during active thumb periods (fig. S4A).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNIs have shown proficiency in amplifying motor nerve signals, enabling motor selectivity, allowing smooth continuous control of one and two DOF thumb movements, and remaining a stable peripheral nerve interface over time.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNIs have shown proficiency in amplifying motor nerve signals, enabling motor selectivity, allowing smooth continuous control of one and two DOF thumb movements, and remaining a stable peripheral nerve interface over time.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Offline Kalman filter analysis showed that the 100-ms bins gave P4 the best decoding performance.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > MATERIALS AND METHODS > Online prosthesis control
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The thumb state vector represents thumb flexion/extension and thumb opposition/reposition position and velocity.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have demonstrated that RPNIs can be used to record efferent motor nerve action potentials at both the intrinsic and extrinsic stages.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNIs have shown proficiency in amplifying motor nerve signals, enabling motor selectivity, allowing smooth continuous control of one and two DOF thumb movements, and remaining a stable peripheral nerve interface over time.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNIs have shown proficiency in amplifying motor nerve signals, enabling motor selectivity, allowing smooth continuous control of one and two DOF thumb movements, and remaining a stable peripheral nerve interface over time.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNIs show potential in enhancing prosthesis control for people with upper limb loss.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > Abstract
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The free muscle graft undergoes an approximately 3-month process of regeneration, revascularization, and reinnervation by the implanted peripheral nerve (12).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests that pattern recognition controllers will still be needed until a more robust continuous controller is developed.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, when intrinsic hand muscles and extrinsic flexors and extensors of the fingers are absent, there is no effective way to obtain these control signals without directly interfacing with the peripheral nerves.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Together, this suggests that RPNIs are functionally selective.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was a significant difference between the original and simulated trajectories (P < 0.001), which suggests that the RPNI signals played an important role in contributing to the subject’s intentional thumb movement.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“RPNIs have provided an alternative where directly extracting efferent motor action potentials from the peripheral nerve is possible.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pilot study has demonstrated that the RPNI technique can be a viable clinical option to improve prosthesis control for upper extremity amputations”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
boostedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have shown in four upper limb amputees that RPNIs might be an effective peripheral nerve interface to provide efferent motor signals for control of prosthetic devices.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The RPNI amplifies efferent nerve signals to provide favorable SNRs for high-fidelity control of both extrinsic and intrinsic hand functions.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: The signals recorded from RPNI electrodes are efferent motor action potentials generated by the RPNI grafts rather than by other sources.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we were limited in the number of intramuscular electrodes that we could implant for safety reasons.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 15
- It may state two separate claims as one. 38
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“RPNI is composed of a transected peripheral nerve, or peripheral nerve fascicle, that is implanted into a free muscle graft (12, 13).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [12] source
- Partly supportedcites [13] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Methods describe an RPNI attached to the end of a divided peripheral nerve. But this study constructed it with cultured myoblasts in a scaffold—silicone mesh or acellular muscle—not by implanting the nerve or a fascicle into a free muscle graft. The cited passages also do not describe use of a nerve fascicle. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“This process creates a stable, peripheral nerve bioamplifier that produces high-amplitude EMG signals, which could be used to control a prosthetic device (14–17).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [14] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [15] source
- Supportedcites [16] source
The Introduction describes the reinnervated muscle graft as a signal amplifier and transducer intended for prosthetic control, and reports earlier rat responses without loss of amplitude over 14 months. Section 4.1 reports large RPNI EMG signals—about 1 mV peak-to-peak—in awake rats. The paper supports their potential use for prosthetic control; it does not claim that such control was demonstrated in humans. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [17] source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In addition, RPNIs have been shown to prevent and treat neuroma pain and phantom pain after amputation (18–20).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] source
- Partly supportedcites [20] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion report reduced neuroma and phantom pain after RPNI surgery in 16 amputees treated for symptomatic neuromas. The Conclusions and Future Directions describe neuroma prevention at primary amputation as a potential use requiring further study; this pilot study does not show prevention of either neuroma or phantom pain. (LLM, conf=0.90)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Electrodes placed within a peripheral nerve can record distinct efferent motor action potentials but over time are susceptible to decline in signal amplitude (3, 4).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [3] source
- Partly supportedcites [4] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results section, “Decoding USEA recordings allowed intuitive control of many movements” (page unavailable), reports neuronal action potentials and distinct movement-related firing patterns from intraneural electrodes. It also reports fewer electrodes with movement-correlated activity over time in one subject, but does not report a decline in signal amplitude; the Discussion (“Decode,” page unavailable) likewise describes declining recording ability, not amplitude. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“This strategy has provided reasonable signal amplitude and some control of a prosthetic limb in patients undergoing transradial amputations (24–28).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [24] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [25] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [26] source
- Partly supportedcites [27] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction says powered transradial prostheses use forearm EMG signal amplitudes for limited control. The Abstract reports that five transradial amputees used residual-forearm signals to control a virtual arm, but the Discussion explicitly says they did not test a physical prosthesis. The paper does not establish a particular ‘reasonable’ signal amplitude. (LLM, conf=0.86)
- Partly supportedcites [28] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Methods and amputee-subject Results report that two transradial amputees used EMG to control a cursor in a virtual task. The Discussion explicitly says physical-prosthesis testing remains to be done, and the paper does not establish that the strategy provided reasonable signal amplitude. Thus, it supports some myoelectric control in transradial amputees, but not the claimed signal amplitude or control of a physical prosthetic limb. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“RPNIs have shown to be an effective technique to reduce symptomatic neuroma pain and also prevent neuroma formation (18–20).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] source
- Partly supportedcites [20] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results report a 71% reduction in neuroma pain among 16 amputees treated with RPNIs. The Abstract Conclusions and Discussion state that RPNIs prevent neuroma formation through their proposed mechanism, but the Conclusions and Future Directions say prophylactic use still needs study. This pilot study therefore supports pain reduction, not a demonstrated clinical benefit in preventing new neuromas. (LLM, conf=0.88)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“have been previously observed to record stable EMG for up to 7.5 years (23).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [23] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Electrode performance; page not provided) report that nerve cuff electrodes continued to function for 7.5 years in one subject. The Methods describe separate implanted EMG recording electrodes, and the Discussion says subjects used them for control, but neither passage reports stable EMG recordings for 7.5 years or identifies the electrodes as RPNIs. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In addition, intraneural probes, such as the Utah slanted electrode array, can provide large signals but currently run into issues of signal stability over time (4).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [4] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion (Study limitations and Decode; page unavailable) reports unstable USEA recording ability and a decline in neural recording from post-implant day 13 to 30. It does not establish that the probes provide large neural signals; its reference to higher-amplitude signals concerns EMG that masked neural activity. (LLM, conf=0.84)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“as is necessary in TMR (29).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [29] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) says TMR transfers remaining arm nerves to residual muscles, and the Methods (page unavailable) identify muscles that received those transfers. Our copy does not say that TMR necessarily cuts the target muscles’ existing nerve branches or denervates existing muscle. (LLM, conf=0.83)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“Similar results have been demonstrated with TMR (37), with a more recent study providing evidence that TMR decreases phantom limb pain (38).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [37] source
The citation to this paper (37) supports the claim that TMR showed similar pain outcomes: the Discussion says its outcomes compared favorably with established techniques, and the Results report resolution of neuroma pain in 14 of 15 patients. The phantom-limb-pain claim is attributed to citation 38, not this source. (LLM, conf=0.92)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [38] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“EMG-driven musculoskeletal models have been developed for real-time, physiologically accurate prosthesis control during functional tasks (30) but have only shown control of two to three DOFs.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [30] source
The EMG-driven Musculoskeletal Model section describes a physiologically correct model operating in real time. The Functional Tasks section reports prosthesis control during real-world activities, while the Results and Discussion describe control of wrist and hand DOFs, including simultaneous control of two DOFs. These passages support the cited example of functional control limited to a small number of DOFs. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, we successfully recorded independent efferent motor action potentials from RPNIs, which provided real-time prosthetic finger control up to 300 days without recalibration of the control algorithm.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Specifically, median RPNI 1 contracted for thumb flexion, whereas median RPNI 2 to RPNI 4 and a subsection of RPNI 1 contracted for index finger flexion (Fig. 2A).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise, P4’s median nerve RPNI had an average peak-to-peak amplitude of 579 ± 209 μV (SNR = 19.1), ulnar nerve RPNI 1 had an amplitude of 334 ± 80.9 μV (SNR = 15.6), and ulnar nerve RPNI 2 had an amplitude of 501 ± 164 μV (SNR = 28.3) (fig. S2, C and D).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For index finger flexion, median RPNI 1 contracted more than the surrounding tissue (P < 0.001), whereas observation of median RPNI 2 to RPNI 4 demonstrated smaller contractions and had mixed pixel changes (table S2).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we observed clear EMG spikes associated with thumb movements in median RPNI 1, with a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of 4.62, and for small finger movements in ulnar RPNI 1 and RPNI 2 (mean SNR = 3.80) (Fig. 2C).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
boostedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In comparison, RPNIs have remained a stable peripheral nerve interface for 2 years in P1, 8 months in P2, 3 years in P3, and 1 year in P4.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A small subsection of the ulnar RPNI did appear to undergo small but visible contractions during volitional index finger movement.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
hedgedcorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The majority of movements were selected quickly, with the fastest motion selection times, or the times between EMG onset and the classifier’s prediction, less than 0.3 s”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, P1’s median RPNI 1 and ulnar RPNI 1 and RPNI 2 had a significant change in mean pixel intensity than the surrounding tissue during thumb and small finger flexion, respectively (P < 0.001 for both comparisons).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaincorrelationalSingle case ·- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“P3 and P4 acquired targets with 100 and 96.3% accuracy on day 0, respectively.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The SNR of the recorded EMG had a mean of 4.21 in P1, 68.9 in P3, and 21.0 in P4.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“P3 and P4 performed the same target hitting task in these two axes, hitting eight targets with 100 and 97.2% accuracy with an average time to success of 0.987 ± 0.16 and 2.83 ± 0.43 s, respectively (Fig. 5, E and F, and movie S9).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, extraction of single motor units from P3 and P4’s median RPNIs showed signal amplitude variability from day to day, ±17.2 and ±6.63%, respectively, but no observable decreasing trend in amplitude (Fig. 5, C and D).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The averaged peak-to-peak amplitude for the most preferred movement on the RPNIs was 2.77 ± 0.660 mV with an SNR of 102 and 501 ± 145 μV with an SNR of 36.1 on P3’s median and ulnar RPNIs, respectively (fig. S2, A and B).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The bulk of RPNI 1 and RPNI 2 contracted during volitional small finger PIP/DIP joint flexion of the phantom hand, whereas a subsection of both RPNIs contracted for thumb movement (Fig. 2A and movie S2).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
plaincorrelationalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a direct comparison, P4 performed the same task using surface EMG (see Materials and Methods), hitting targets with 78.4% accuracy with an average time to success of 4.40 ± 0.50 s (movie S10).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For the ulnar nerve RPNIs, RPNI activation appropriately occurred during flexion of the phantom thumb, whereas minimal activation occurred during index finger flexion.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“P3 and P4’s averaged motion selection time across all movements were 0.172 ± 0.105 and 0.234 ± 0.0894 s, respectively (means ± SD; table S3).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we did not need to transect any nerve branches to any of the residual muscles of the upper arm and, thus, did not denervate existing muscle”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, recording specific efferent motor action potentials is challenging because of the small amplitude of the signals, limiting the number of independent control signals that can be recorded (9).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [9] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“With TMR, a normally innervated muscle must be partially denervated to provide a new target for recording EMG signals from the implanted nerve.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Instead, electrical stimulation has shown promise in providing tactile feedback through stimulation of afferent sensory axons (3, 5–7).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Here, we showed that the regenerative peripheral nerve interface (RPNI) serves as a biologically stable bioamplifier of efferent motor action potentials with long-term stability in upper limb amputees.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, two or three nerves (median, radial, and ulnar) may be implanted into the same target muscle (for example, the pectoralis major muscle), making it difficult to record independent control signals from individual nerves or fascicles.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) can provide multiple control signals by transferring divided peripheral nerves in a residual limb to intact local or regional muscles. Surface electromyography (EMG) is then used to record the efferent motor control signals (10).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [10] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Surface EMG amplitude was lower than intramuscular EMG, which may have contributed to the decrease in performance.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Real-time myoelectric prosthetic control
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“P3’s nerves had an additional 2 years to reinnervate his muscle grafts before electrode implantation.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plainSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was anatomically unexpected but may be due to P1’s 16-year period without a hand, making certain volitional movements difficult to generate independently.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
hedgedconditionalSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our study design did not include a direct comparison to other surgical approaches (for example, TMR).”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These RPNI contractions, seen in two participants missing finger-related musculature, suggest that nerves carrying efferent motor action potentials controlling finger functionality successfully reinnervated the RPNIs, allowing P1 and P2 to have volitional control over their phantom hand.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
hedgeddirectn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The attempted phantom finger movements made by participants correspond to volitional motor commands in the residual nerves that can drive RPNI contractions.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The wide SNR gap between P1, P3, and P4 is likely due to the smaller bipolar electrode spacing in acute fine wires (1 mm) versus indwelling EMG electrodes (10 mm), whereas the difference between P3 and P4’s measured SNR may be due to the period of reinnervation.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These findings suggest that efferent motor action potentials can be recorded using RPNIs from individual nerve fascicles, each of which may have distinct and unique motor control signals.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The signals recorded from RPNI electrodes are efferent motor action potentials generated by the RPNI grafts rather than by other sources.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The more accurate surgical targeting of the bipolar indwelling electrode into the RPNI may account for the larger amplitude efferent motor action potential signals compared with P1.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Surgically implanted indwelling bipolar electrodes
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests that these RPNI grafts amplify efferent motor nerve action potentials, actively contract, and generate EMG signals similar to residual muscle.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > RESULTS > Observed muscle contractions of the RPNI
hedgeddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The signals recorded from RPNI electrodes are efferent motor action potentials generated by the RPNI grafts rather than by other sources.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The Institutional Review Board at the University of Michigan approved this study, and each participant provided written and informed consent.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > MATERIALS AND METHODS > Study design
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No power analysis was calculated before the study.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > MATERIALS AND METHODS > Study design
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was a first-in-human, non-blinded, nonrandomized pilot study.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > MATERIALS AND METHODS > Study design
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This led to a careful decision on which residual muscles to implant to provide the best prosthesis control for the subjects.”
§ A regenerative peripheral nerve interface allows real-time control of an artificial hand in upper limb amputees > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
The attempted phantom finger movements made by participants correspond to volitional motor commands in the residual nerves that can drive RPNI contractions.
“Participants were asked at the beginning of each behavioral task whether they could move the fingers of their phantom limb. In this situation, the RPNIs were observed contracting during movement of the phantom fingers.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The signals recorded from RPNI electrodes are efferent motor action potentials generated by the RPNI grafts rather than by other sources.
“In both participants, large amplitude, anatomically appropriate motor control signals were recorded from the indwelling RPNI electrodes (n = 2,3).”
The paper relies on this without support.
Both the median and ulnar nerves supply several intrinsic thumb muscles that help flex the thumb CMC and MCP joints.
“This is anatomically appropriate since both the median and ulnar nerves innervate several intrinsic muscles, which assist in flexing the thumb CMC/MCP joints.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The thumb state vector represents thumb flexion/extension and thumb opposition/reposition position and velocity.
“We assume that the thumb state vector xt represents the position and velocity of the thumb flexion/extension and thumb opposition/reposition.”
Citations
Cites
MuJoCo: A physics engine for model-based control
Todorov, E., Erez, T., & Tassa, Y. (2012) · 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems · doi:10.1109/iros.2012.6386109 · Cited by 4,767
A new strategy for multifunction myoelectric control
Hudgins, B., Parker, P., & Scott, R. N. (1993) · IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1109/10.204774 · Cited by 2,149 · cited 1×
“The real-time computer calculated the mean absolute value (MAV) from the EMG waveform (10, 35).”
MethodUse of NeuroEyeCoach™ to Improve Eye Movement Efficacy in Patients with Homonymous Visual Field Loss
Sahraie, A., Smania, N., & Zihl, J. (2016) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2016/5186461 · Cited by 1,777
Targeted Muscle Reinnervation for Real-time Myoelectric Control of Multifunction Artificial Arms
Kuiken, T. A. (2009) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.116 · Cited by 1,089
Restoring natural sensory feedback in real-time bidirectional hand prostheses
Raspopovic, S., Capogrosso, M., Petrini, F. M., Bonizzato, M., Rigosa, J., Di Pino, G., Carpaneto, J., Controzzi, M., Boretius, T., Fernandez, E., et al. (2014) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3006820 · Cited by 1,001
Navarro, X., Krueger, T. B., Lago, N., Micera, S., Stieglitz, T., & Dario, P. (2005) · Journal of the Peripheral Nervous System · doi:10.1111/j.1085-9489.2005.10303.x · Cited by 845 · cited 1×
“However, current peripheral nerve interfaces have limitations, which minimize their clinical utility (1, 2).”
BackgroundA neural interface provides long-term stable natural touch perception
Tan, D. W., Schiefer, M. A., Keith, M. W., Anderson, J. R., Tyler, J., & Tyler, D. J. (2014) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.3008669 · Cited by 751
Dumanian, G. A., Potter, B. K., Mioton, L. M., Ko, J. H., Cheesborough, J. E., Souza, J. M., Ertl, W. J., Tintle, S. M., Nanos, G. P., Valerio, I. L., et al. (2019) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000003088 · Cited by 530
Quantifying Pattern Recognition—Based Myoelectric Control of Multifunctional Transradial Prostheses
Li, G., Schultz, A. E., & Kuiken, T. A. (2010) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2009.2039619 · Cited by 443
A heuristic fuzzy logic approach to EMG pattern recognition for multifunctional prosthesis control
Ajiboye, A. B., & Weir, R. F. (2005) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2005.847357 · Cited by 415
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Next Decade of Immune Checkpoint Therapy
Sharma, P., Siddiqui, B. A., Anandhan, S., Yadav, S. S., Subudhi, S. K., Gao, J., Goswami, S., & Allison, J. P. (2021) · Cancer Discovery · doi:10.1158/2159-8290.cd-20-1680 · Cited by 750
Wu, H., Yang, G., Zhu, K., Liu, S., Guo, W., Jiang, Z., & Li, Z. (2021) · Advanced Science · doi:10.1002/advs.202001938 · Cited by 395
Toward higher-performance bionic limbs for wider clinical use
Farina, D., Vujaklija, I., Brånemark, R., Bull, A. M. J., Dietl, H., Graimann, B., Hargrove, L. J., Hoffmann, K.-P., Huang, H., Ingvarsson, T., et al. (2021) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-021-00732-x · Cited by 263
“These individual groups of contracting muscle can then produce high-fidelity motor-control signals with favourable signal-to-noise ratios for the real-time control of a prosthesis 129–131 .”
BackgroundThe neural mechanisms of manual dexterity
Sobinov, A. R., & Bensmaia, S. J. (2021) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-021-00528-7 · Cited by 248
Water-responsive supercontractile polymer films for bioelectronic interfaces
Yi, J., Zou, G., Huang, J., Ren, X., Tian, Q., Yu, Q., Wang, P., Yuan, Y., Tang, W., Wang, C., et al. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06732-y · Cited by 253
“RPNI involves implanting the transected peripheral nerve into a free muscle graft harvested from healthy native donor muscles 44,45 .”
Metadata
- Authors
- Vu, P. P., Vaskov, A. K., Irwin, Z. T., Henning, P. T., Lueders, D. R., Laidlaw, A. T., Davis, A. J., Nu, C. S., Gates, D. H., Gillespie, R. B., Kemp, S. W. P., Kung, T. A., Chestek, C. A., & Cederna, P. S.
- Affiliations
- University of Michigan (US)
- Michigan Medicine (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chestek, Cynthia A.
- Cederna, Paul S.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Science Translational Medicine
- Published
- 2020-03-04
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 533
- ISSN
- 1946-6234 (ISSN-L)
- 1946-6242
- PMC
- PMC8082695
- OpenAlex
- W3009733360
- Cited by
- 291
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 33 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 53 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 36 · 2020: 18
- FWCI
- 18.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Science Translational Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Defense Sciences Office, DARPA (N66001-16-1-4006)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neural Engineering
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Muscle activation and electromyography studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
- Keywords
- regenerative peripheral nerve interface, peripheral nerve interfaces, upper limb amputees, prosthetic hand control, neuroprosthetics, bioamplification, functional reinnervation, electromyography, signal stability
- MeSH terms
- Amputees, Artificial Limbs, Electromyography, Hand, Humans, Peripheral Nerves, Upper Extremity
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
