Trial reportScientific reports2019
Visual dynamics cues in learning complex physical interactions.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Exploiting telerobotics for sensorimotor rehabilitation: a locomotor embodiment.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2021Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study investigated the role of visual dynamics cues (VDCs) in learning to interact with a complex physical system. Manual gait training was used as an exemplary case, as it requires therapists to control the non-trivial locomotor dynamics of patients. A virtual analog was developed that allowed naïve subjects to manipulate the leg of a virtual stroke survivor (a virtual patient; VP) walking on a treadmill using a small robotic manipulandum. The task was to make the VP's leg pass through early, mid, and late swing gait targets. One group of subjects (n = 17) started practice seeing the VP's affected thigh and shank (i.e., VDCs); a second control group (n = 16) only saw the point-of-contact (VP ankle). It was hypothesized that, if seeing the VP's leg provides beneficial dynamics information, the VDC group would have better task performance and generalization than controls. Results were not supportive. Both groups had similar task performance, and for the late swing gait target, a decrement in manipulative accuracy was observed when VDCs were removed in a generalization task. This suggests that when learning to manipulate complex dynamics, VDCs can create a dependency that negatively affects generalization if the visual context is changed.
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.