Frontier
What the newest work on reading the brain, stimulating the cord and repairing it has shown, and what it has not. Each item is tiered by its evidence, dated, and checked again at least every six months.
- T1 peer-reviewed human study
- T2 peer-reviewed animal or in-vitro study
- T3 preprint
- T4 company announcement or press report
- T5 expert opinion or textbook convention
These are research results in a few participants, not treatments on offer. Nothing here is advice about any person’s care. The simplified versions you can run are in the decoding lab and the digital bridge.
Reading the brain
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2012-05Clinical trial
People with tetraplegia reach and grasp with a robotic arm
Signals from a 96-channel array in the motor cortex were decoded to control a robotic arm and hand. Two people with long-standing tetraplegia made three-dimensional reach and grasp movements; one drank coffee from a bottle.
What it does not show: The arm was slower and less accurate than a natural arm, and the participants did not move their own limbs.
Source: Hochberg et al. 2012. Checked 2026-10-02.
Speech and communication neuroprostheses
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2024-08Clinical trial
A speech neuroprosthesis that calibrates quickly
Four microelectrode arrays (256 electrodes) in the left ventral precentral gyrus of a man with ALS reached 99.6% accuracy with a 50-word vocabulary on the first day, 90.2% with a 125,000-word vocabulary on the second day, and sustained 97.5% accuracy over 8.4 months; he used it to converse at about 32 words per minute for more than 248 hours.
What it does not show: One participant in a clinical trial; it needs brain surgery and is not an approved device.
Source: Card et al. 2024. Checked 2026-10-02.
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2023-08Clinical trial
Speech to text at 62 words per minute
Intracortical arrays recorded spiking activity while a participant with ALS attempted to speak. Word error rate was 9.1% on a 50-word vocabulary and 23.8% on a 125,000-word vocabulary, at 62 words per minute.
What it does not show: One participant; with a large vocabulary about one word in four was wrong.
Source: Willett et al. 2023. Checked 2026-10-02.
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2023-08Clinical trial
Text, voice and a speaking avatar from the speech cortex
High-density surface recordings of the speech cortex were decoded into text, synthesised speech and facial-avatar movement. Text decoding ran at a median 78 words per minute with a median word error rate of 25%, after less than two weeks of training.
What it does not show: One participant; error rates remain far above natural speech.
Source: Metzger et al. 2023. Checked 2026-10-02.
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2021-05Clinical trial
Typing by imagined handwriting
An intracortical interface decoded attempted handwriting from motor cortex with a recurrent neural network. The participant, whose hand was paralysed by spinal cord injury, typed 90 characters per minute with 94.1% raw accuracy online.
What it does not show: One participant with implanted arrays; it restores communication, not hand movement.
Source: Willett et al. 2021. Checked 2026-10-02.
Bridging brain and spine
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2023-05Clinical trial
A brain-spine interface lets a man with tetraplegia walk again
Two 64-electrode implants over the sensorimotor cortex read the intention to move a hip, knee or ankle; a decoder turns it into stimulation of the lumbosacral cord through an implanted paddle lead. The participant, with an incomplete cervical injury from ten years earlier, stood, walked and climbed stairs; the system stayed reliable for a year including use at home, and he regained some walking with crutches even with it switched off.
What it does not show: One participant, with an incomplete injury and earlier stimulation training. It does not repair the cord, and it is not an approved treatment.
Source: Lorach et al. 2023. Checked 2026-10-02.
Writing to the nervous system
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2022-02Clinical trial
Activity-specific stimulation after complete paralysis
A new paddle lead was arranged to target the dorsal roots for leg and trunk movements, with software for activity-specific stimulation programs. Within a single day, three people with complete sensorimotor paralysis could stand, walk, cycle, swim and control trunk movements with stimulation.
What it does not show: Three participants; the movements need the stimulation programs to run, and the cord injury itself is not healed.
Source: Rowald et al. 2022. Checked 2026-10-02.
- T1 peer-reviewed human study2018-10Clinical trial
Stimulation timed to the intended step restores walking
Trains of spatially selective stimulation were delivered to the lumbosacral cord at the moment each leg movement was intended. In people injured more than four years earlier, adaptive control of paralysed muscles returned within a week; after months of rehabilitation some regained voluntary control without stimulation.
What it does not show: A small group with incomplete or chronic injuries; walking needed the implant and assistance, and results do not predict any one person's recovery.
Source: Wagner et al. 2018. Checked 2026-10-02.
Repair
- T2 peer-reviewed animal or in-vitro study2023-09Research
Regrowing the right axons to the right place restores walking in mice
After identifying the neuron types that restore walking after incomplete injury, the team guided their cut axons back to their natural target region. In mice with complete spinal cord injury this led to substantial recovery of walking, whereas regrowth simply across the lesion had no effect.
What it does not show: Mice, not people. No human treatment exists from this work.
Source: Squair et al. 2023. Checked 2026-10-02.