ArticlePloS one2022
A Multifunctional Adaptive and Interactive AI system to support people living with stroke, acquired brain or spinal cord injuries: A study protocol.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovative Assistive Technologies for Tetraplegia: A Narrative Review of Systematic and Emerging Evidence.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Towards Transforming Neurorehabilitation: The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Diagnosis and Treatment of Neurological Disorders.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Development and Use of Assistive Technologies in Spinal Cord Injury: A Narrative Review of Reviews on the Evolution, Opportunities, and Bottlenecks of Their Integration in the Health Domain.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Acceptance of Assistive Technology by Users with Motor Disabilities Due to Spinal Cord or Acquired Brain Injuries: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Co-designing an interactive artificial intelligent system with post-stroke patients and caregivers to augment the lost abilities and improve their quality of life: a human-centric approach.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAcquired brain injury and spinal cord injury are leading causes of severe motor disabilities impacting a person's autonomy and social life. Enhancing neurological recovery driven by neurogenesis and neuronal plasticity could represent future solutions; however, at present, recovery of activities employing assistive technologies integrating artificial intelligence is worthy of examining. MAIA (Multifunctional, adaptive, and interactive AI system for Acting in multiple contexts) is a human-centered AI aiming to allow end-users to control assistive devices naturally and efficiently by using continuous bidirectional exchanges among multiple sensorimotor information.
methodsAimed at exploring the acceptability of MAIA, semi-structured interviews (both individual interviews and focus groups) are used to prompt possible end-users (both patients and caregivers) to express their opinions about expected functionalities, outfits, and the services that MAIA should embed, once developed, to fit end-users needs. DISCUSSION: End-user indications are expected to interest MAIA technical, health-related, and setting components. Moreover, psycho-social issues are expected to align with the technology acceptance model. In particular, they are likely to involve intrinsic motivational and extrinsic social aspects, aspects concerning the usefulness of the MAIA system, and the related ease to use. At last, we expect individual factors to impact MAIA: gender, fragility levels, psychological aspects involved in the mental representation of body image, personal endurance, and tolerance toward AT-related burden might be the aspects end-users rise in evaluating the MAIA project.
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.