ArticleScientific reports2021
Visual feedback improves bimanual force control performances at planning and execution levels.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Trial
- Cortical mapping of real-time ultrasound-imaging visual feedback for ankle dorsiflexion in patients after stroke: a fNIRS study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Construction and evaluation of a finger motor feedback system to improve finger dexterity.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2025Article
- Bilateral force control and coordination patterns across upper and lower limbs.EXCLI journal · 2025Article
- Low-Cost Dynamometer for Measuring and Regulating Wrist Extension and Flexion Motor Tasks in Electroencephalography Experiments.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Higher visual gain contributions to bilateral motor synergies and force control.Scientific reports · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of different visual conditions and targeted force levels on bilateral motor synergies and bimanual force control performances. Fourteen healthy young participants performed bimanual isometric force control tasks by extending their wrists and fingers under two visual feedback conditions (i.e., vision and no-vision) and three targeted force levels (i.e., 5%, 25%, and 50% of maximum voluntary contraction: MVC). To estimate bilateral motor synergies across multiple trials, we calculated the proportion of good variability relative to bad variability using an uncontrolled manifold analysis. To assess bimanual force control performances within a trial, we used the accuracy, variability, and regularity of total forces produced by two hands. Further, analysis included correlation coefficients between forces from the left and right hands. In addition, we examined the correlations between altered bilateral motor synergies and force control performances from no-vision to vision conditions for each targeted force level. Importantly, our findings revealed that the presence of visual feedback increased bilateral motor synergies across multiple trials significantly with a reduction of bad variability as well as improved bimanual force control performances within a trial based on higher force accuracy, lower force variability, less force regularity, and decreased correlation coefficients between hands. Further, we found two significant correlations in (a) increased bilateral motor synergy versus higher force accuracy at 5% of MVC and (b) increased bilateral motor synergy versus lower force variability at 50% of MVC. Together, these results suggested that visual feedback effectively improved both synergetic coordination behaviors across multiple trials and stability of task performance within a trial across various submaximal force levels.
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.