Journal of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation Research

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.

Commentary - Journal of Neurology and Neurorehabilitation Research (2025) Volume 10, Issue 3

The Role of Functional Connectivity Mapping in Guiding Personalized Neurorehabilitation Interventions

Sofia Martinez*

Department of Neurophysiology, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile.

*Corresponding Author:
Sofia Martinez
Department of Neurophysiology
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Chile
E-mail: s.martinez@uc.cl

Received: 03-Jul-2025, Manuscript No. JNNR-25-171938; Editor assigned: 04-Jul-2025, PreQC No. JNNR-25-1719385(PQ); Reviewed: 18-Jul-2025, QC No JNNR-25-1719385; Revised: 21-Jul-2025, Manuscript No. JNNR-25-1719385(R); Published: 28-Jul-2025, DOI:10.35841/ aajnnr -10.3.266

Citation: Martinez S. The role of functional connectivity mapping in guiding personalized neurorehabilitation interventions. J Neurol Neurorehab Res. 2025;10(3):266.

Introduction

Functional connectivity mapping has emerged as a transformative tool in the assessment and planning of neurorehabilitation strategies. By quantifying the dynamic interactions among cortical and subcortical regions, connectivity analyses provide insights into the integrity of neural networks disrupted by neurological injury. Techniques such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and electroencephalography (EEG) allow for real-time evaluation of network activity, offering a framework to design targeted interventions that optimize recovery outcomes. Understanding how functional networks reorganize after injury can inform individualized therapy approaches, improving both motor and cognitive rehabilitation efficacy [1].

Recent studies have demonstrated that network-level alterations are highly predictive of rehabilitation success. For instance, patients exhibiting preserved connectivity within the default mode network and sensorimotor circuits often respond more favorably to task-specific training and neuromodulation therapies. Conversely, disrupted interhemispheric connectivity can impede functional recovery, necessitating strategies that restore balance between hemispheres. These findings underscore the importance of integrating functional connectivity assessments into clinical decision-making to tailor rehabilitation protocols to each patient’s unique neural architecture [2].

Functional connectivity mapping also facilitates the optimization of neuromodulatory interventions. Non-invasive brain stimulation techniques, including TMS and tDCS, can be applied to selectively enhance or suppress activity within specific networks. By targeting nodes that are central to disrupted pathways, these interventions reinforce adaptive plasticity and promote compensatory reorganization. Emerging evidence suggests that combining connectivity-guided stimulation with conventional therapy maximizes recovery potential, particularly in motor and cognitive domains affected by stroke or traumatic brain injury [3].

Beyond motor rehabilitation, connectivity mapping has significant implications for cognitive recovery. Cognitive networks responsible for attention, memory, and executive function can be selectively targeted to enhance task-specific training outcomes. Moreover, longitudinal monitoring of network connectivity provides objective biomarkers for tracking progress and adjusting therapeutic interventions over time. Integration of these approaches can facilitate precision neurorehabilitation, enabling clinicians to intervene proactively based on network-level vulnerabilities and recovery trajectories [4].

Despite its potential, challenges remain in translating connectivity mapping into routine clinical practice. Variability in acquisition methods, data analysis pipelines, and patient-specific factors complicates interpretation and implementation. Standardization of protocols, development of accessible software tools, and clinician training are critical to bridging the gap between research and practice. Future advancements in real-time connectivity analysis and closed-loop neurostimulation hold promise for revolutionizing personalized rehabilitation paradigms [5].

Conclusion

Functional connectivity mapping offers a powerful framework for designing personalized neurorehabilitation strategies. By providing detailed insights into the integrity and dynamics of neural networks, these techniques guide targeted interventions that enhance motor and cognitive recovery. Continued research and technological innovation will be essential to fully integrate connectivity-guided approaches into routine clinical practice, advancing the efficacy and precision of neurorehabilitation.

References

  1. Muller F, O'Rahilly R. Cerebral dysraphia (future anencephaly) in a human twin embryo at stage 13 . Teratology 1984; 30:167–77.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  2. Papp Z, Csecsei K, Toth Z, Polgar K, Szeifert GT. . Exencephaly in human fetuses . Clin Genet 1986; 30:440–4.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  3. Urich H, Herrick MK. The amniotic band syndrome as a cause of anencephaly: report of a case . Acta Neuropathol (Berl) 1985; 67:190–4.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  4. Chaurasia BD. . Calvarial defect in human anencephaly . Teratology 1984; 29:165–72.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

  5. Sadovnick AD, Baird PA. . Congenital malformations associated with anencephaly in liveborn and stillborn infants . Teratology 1985; 32:355–61

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Cross Ref

Get the App