Scoping review identifies best practices for rigor and transparency in spinal cord stimulation research.
<ns5:p> Spinal cord stimulation is an emerging treatment in spinal cord injury and chronic low back pain. This scoping review aimed to identify and consolidate key criteria for rigor, transparency and reproducibility across reporting guidelines for research on spinal cord stimulation, and ensure all relevant criteria are captured, as a first step to identify and evaluate broader strategies for good research practices. Findings were used to to refine mechanisms for rigor, transparency and reproducibility in a causal graph. Four databases were searched from inception to 12 September 2024, and monitored through weekly article alerts up till 29 November 2024. Reviewers independently assessed articles for inclusion if they were (1) standards, guidelines, recommendations, or statements for research on humans, (2) on rigor, transparency and reproducibility, in stimulation or neuromodulation, and (3) written in English. The following data were extracted and synthesized: stimulation type, clinical area, type of responsible practice, and article text on responsible practice. Differences between reviewers were resolved by consensus, and findings used to refine the causal graph. Eleven articles of the following types were included: formal reporting guidelines, standards or checklists (n = 6), general recommendations (n = 4) or systematic review (n = 1). Data were synthesized and used to refine the initial causal graph. The nodes <ns5:italic>Reporting of experimental conditions</ns5:italic> , <ns5:italic>Protocol registration</ns5:italic> , and <ns5:italic>Open science practices</ns5:italic> were unchanged. The node <ns5:italic>Reporting study design to minimize bias</ns5:italic> was refined as <ns5:italic>Reporting study, participant, and investigator characteristics</ns5:italic> ; the node <ns5:italic>Reporting stimulation parameters</ns5:italic> was refined as <ns5:italic>Reporting stimulation configuration and parameters;</ns5:italic> and the new node <ns5:italic>Reporting adverse events</ns5:italic> was added. The responsible reporting of spinal cord stimulation research should also explicitly include study, participant and investigator characteristics, stimulation configuration and parameters, and adverse events. </ns5:p>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Navarro et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: