BetaEntity Annotation Prototype
← Back to institutions

Annotated abstract

Methodological limitations and conflicts of interest in spinal cord stimulation research impair trustworthiness

rapm · 2026-05-29 · canonical JSON source

1 visible annotations · policy: published · automated confidence ≥ 75.00%

Document resource

We write as concerned researchers in neurostimulation and evidence synthesis. This is now the third systematic review and meta-analysis from this group on near-identical research questions,1 2 all referencing the same PROSPERO systematic review protocol, in which the authors have known conflicts of interest with the neurostimulation industry. In this 2026 publication, the review was sponsored by a neurostimulation device manufacturer (Saluda Medical) and authors involved in decisions on trial inclusion/exclusion were paid employees of, or held stocks in, medical device companies. These conflicts of interest are likely to predispose authors toward favoring positive treatment effects.