ArticlemHealth2022
Trsper: a web-based application for Archimedes spiral analysis.
Article in mHealth, 2022. 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.
- Feasibility Pilot of the LaceUp Compression-Weight Sleeve for Essential Tremor.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Clinical Applications and Measurement Properties of the Digitized Archimedes Spiral Drawing Test: A Scoping Review.Movement disorders clinical practice · 2025Article
- Enhancing public health in developing nations through smartphone-based motor assessment.Frontiers in digital health · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWe built a web-based application of the Archimedes spiral exam that implements clinically validated spiral metrics and tested drawing instructions to define a clinical workflow.
methodsWe designed an HTML5 and Javascript implementation of the spiral exam to run on mobile touchscreen devices. We then recruited 10 volunteers each for 2 experiments designed to validate the programmed spiral metrics and assess how instructions or drawing implement affect the results. In task one, volunteers drew 5 spirals each while following 6 different instruction sets (n=30 spirals each, n=300 spirals total) that varied by support of the drawing hand and tracing condition (either tracing a spiral template, drawing in-between it, or freehand). In task two, volunteers drew 5 spirals each while following 2 instruction sets and drawing using a stylus or their dominant index finger (n=20 spirals each, n=200 spirals total).
resultsPrincipal components analysis of calculated metrics revealed that the experiments grouped by instruction set and by subject. Mean Euclidean distance between experiments represented as 11-dimensional vectors revealed that consistency varied among instruction tasks and that drawing with a stylus produced more consistent results than did using the dominant index finger. Using experimental data and simulated abnormal spirals, we designed a decision support system that accurately identifies potentially abnormal spirals.
conclusionsWe built and validated a robust digital implementation of the Archimedes spiral exam and recommend a sensitive and specific workflow on the basis of data gathered from healthy volunteers.
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.