Clinical Research Library
What does the published research say about PEMF and bioregulation?
This library holds 50 published studies across 16 clinical categories, each graded A through F on a published scale, with Review and Ongoing Trial as separate labels. Negative and preclinical findings are listed alongside positive ones. No category currently holds an A grade.
Last reviewed 2026-08-27. Read the grading methodology.
How can I filter these studies?
By category
Showing 6 of 50 studies. Clear all filters
| Category | Study | Grade | Design | Population | Year | Link |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chronic Pain | 2024 Meta-Analysis: PEMF for Osteoarthritis | A- | Systematic review and meta-analysis | Not reported | 2024 | PubMed 38610722 |
| Chronic Pain | Neurofeedback for Chronic Pain: Meta-Analysis | B+ | Systematic review and meta-analysis | Not reported | 2020 | PubMed 32502283 |
| Chronic Pain | Electrodermal Biofeedback for Pain & Inflammation | B | Controlled clinical study | Patients aged 30-86 with chronic pain | 2019 | PubMed 30805908 |
| Chronic Pain | Knee Osteoarthritis: Wearable PEMF vs Placebo (RCT) | A- | Randomized controlled trial | 66 adults with radiographic knee OA | 2016 | PubMed 26705327 |
| Chronic Pain | PEMF for Osteoarthritis: Landmark Study | A- | Randomized controlled trial | 167 patients with knee or cervical spine OA | 1994 | PubMed 7837158 |
| Chronic Pain | Biofeedback for Chronic Back Pain: Meta-Analysis | B+ | Meta-analysis | 1,062 patients with chronic back pain | Not reported | PubMed 27307013 |
A positive PEMF study is not evidence for a specific device unless the signal parameters studied are reasonably comparable to what that device produces. Read the methodology and its stated limitations before drawing conclusions from any single row above.
Continue
How the library is built, and where to go next.