ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2019
Haptic Error Modulation Outperforms Visual Error Amplification When Learning a Modified Gait Pattern.
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Haptic feedback in violin education as a case study of robotic exoskeleton-mediated motor learning.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Designing for usability: development and evaluation of a portable minimally-actuated haptic hand and forearm trainer for unsupervised stroke rehabilitation.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2024Article
- Light-Weight Wearable Gyroscopic Actuators Can Modulate Balance Performance and Gait Characteristics: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Effect of immersive visualization technologies on cognitive load, motivation, usability, and embodiment.Virtual reality · 2023Article
- Article
- Towards functional robotic training: motor learning of dynamic tasks is enhanced by haptic rendering but hampered by arm weight support.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Human-machine-human interaction in motor control and rehabilitation: a review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2021Review
- Varied movement errors drive learning of dynamic balance control during walking in people with incomplete spinal cord injury: a pilot study.Experimental brain research · 2020Article
- Promoting Motor Variability During Robotic Assistance Enhances Motor Learning of Dynamic Tasks.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
- A Review of Robot-Assisted Lower-Limb Stroke Therapy: Unexplored Paths and Future Directions in Gait Rehabilitation.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2020Review
- Providing low-dimensional feedback of a high-dimensional movement allows for improved performance of a skilled walking task.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Individualized feedback to change multiple gait deficits in chronic stroke.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2019Article
- Learning and transfer of complex motor skills in virtual reality: a perspective review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2019Review
- Rowing Simulator Modulates Water Density to Foster Motor Learning.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robotic algorithms that augment movement errors have been proposed as promising training strategies to enhance motor learning and neurorehabilitation. However, most research effort has focused on rehabilitation of upper limbs, probably because large movement errors are especially dangerous during gait training, as they might result in stumbling and falling. Furthermore, systematic large movement errors might limit the participants' motivation during training. In this study, we investigated the effect of training with novel error modulating strategies, which guarantee a safe training environment, on motivation and learning of a modified asymmetric gait pattern. Thirty healthy young participants walked in the exoskeletal robotic system Lokomat while performing a foot target-tracking task, which required an increased hip and knee flexion in the dominant leg. Learning the asymmetric gait pattern with three different strategies was evaluated: (i) No disturbance: no robot disturbance/guidance was applied, (ii) haptic error amplification: unsafe and discouraging large errors were limited with haptic guidance, while haptic error amplification enhanced awareness of small errors relevant for learning, and (iii) visual error amplification: visually observed errors were amplified in a virtual reality environment. We also evaluated whether increasing the movement variability during training by adding randomly varying haptic disturbances on top of the other training strategies further enhances learning. We analyzed participants' motor performance and self-reported intrinsic motivation before, during and after training. We found that training with the novel haptic error amplification strategy did not hamper motor adaptation and enhanced transfer of the practiced asymmetric gait pattern to free walking. Training with visual error amplification, on the other hand, increased errors during training and hampered motor learning. Participants who trained with visual error amplification also reported a reduced perceived competence. Adding haptic disturbance increased the movement variability during training, but did not have a significant effect on motor adaptation, probably because training with haptic disturbance on top of visual and haptic error amplification decreased the participants' feelings of competence. The proposed novel haptic error modulating controller that amplifies small task-relevant errors while limiting large errors outperformed visual error augmentation and might provide a promising framework to improve robotic gait training outcomes in neurological patients.
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.