ArticleErgonomics2017
Drop-off detection with the long cane: effect of cane shaft weight and rigidity on performance.
Article in Ergonomics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Biomechanics of Long Cane Use.Journal of visual impairment & blindness · 2019Article
- Effect of cane length and swing arc width on drop-off and obstacle detection with the long cane.The British journal of visual impairment · 2017Article
- Obstacle Detection with the Long Cane: Effect of Cane Tip Design and Technique Modification on Performance.Journal of visual impairment & blindnessArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Most travellers who are blind rely on a long cane to detect drop-offs on their walking paths. We examined how different cane shaft materials affect drop-off detection performance through providing different vibrotactile and proprioceptive feedbacks to the cane user. Results of the study showed a significant interaction between cane shaft weight and how the cane is used. A heavier cane was advantageous for detecting drop-offs when the individual used the 'constant contact technique' - cane tip stays in contact with the walking surface at all times - but not when he used the 'two-point touch technique' - cane tip is rhythmically tapped on the surface. In addition, a more flexible cane was advantageous for detecting drop-offs when the two-point touch technique was used but not when the constant contact technique was used. It is recommended that, when blind individuals select a cane shaft material, they consider which long cane technique they use more often. Practitioner Summary: Long cane shaft material affects how well a blind individual can detect drop-offs. A heavier shaft was advantageous when using the constant contact technique (cane tip stays in continuous contact with the surface), while a more flexible shaft was better when using the two-point touch technique (cane tip rhythmically taps the surface).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.