ArticleBMJ open2021
Cognitive measures during walking with and without lower-limb prosthesis: protocol for a scoping review.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. 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.
- Measuring mental workload in assistive wearable devices: a review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2021Review
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
introductionTuning of lower-limb (LL) robotic prosthesis control is necessary to provide personalised assistance to each human wearer during walking. Prostheses wearers' adaptation processes are subjective and the efficiency largely depends on one's mental processes. Therefore, beyond physical motor performance, prosthesis personalisation should consider the wearer's preference and cognitive performance during walking. As a first step, it is necessary to examine the current measures of cognitive performance when a wearer walks with an LL prosthesis, identify the gaps and methodological considerations, and explore additional measures in a walking setting. In this protocol, we outlined a scoping review that will systematically summarise and evaluate the measures of cognitive performance during walking with and without LL prosthesis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review process will be guided and documented by CADIMA, an open-access online data management portal for evidence synthesis. Keyword searches will be conducted in seven databases (Web of Science, MEDLINE, BIOSIS, SciELO Citation Index, ProQuest, CINAHL and PsycINFO) up to 2020 supplemented with grey literature searches. Retrieved records will be screened by at least two independent reviewers on the title-and-abstract level and then the full-text level. Selected studies will be evaluated for reporting bias. Data on sample characteristics, type of cognitive function, characteristics of cognitive measures, task prioritisation, experimental design and walking setting will be extracted. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This scoping review will evaluate the measures used in previously published studies thus does not require ethical approval. The results will contribute to the advancement of prosthesis tuning processes by reviewing the application status of cognitive measures during walking with and without prosthesis and laying the foundation for developing needed measures for cognitive assessment during walking. The results will be disseminated through conferences and journals.
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.