ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
Assistive Technology in Multiple Sclerosis Patients-Two Points of View.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Next-generation Solutions: Are Patients Ready for Electronic Artificial Urinary Sphincters for Male Incontinence?European urology open science · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe goal of our study was determining the current needs and acceptance of patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) in the field of assistive technologies using materials from the "RAMCIP" project (Robotic Assistant for Mild Cognitive Impairment Patient at Home).
methodsThere were two target groups: a population with MS, and medical personnel experienced in treating MS patients. This study was based on a two-step design method (workshops and surveys). Using the Likert scale, we identified the prioritization of users' needs. Additionally, demographic and disease-specific data and their correlations with each other and with the level of priority of functionality were analyzed. Moreover, the acceptance aspect of the assistant robot and the respondents' readiness to use it were determined.
resultsWe gathered 307 completed surveys (176 from MS patients, 131 from medical personnel). Functional capabilities from the safety category were a high priority in most cases. The medium priority functions concerned daily activities that required physical assistance and home management. The differences in prioritization between the two groups were also found. Variables such as age, level of disability, cognitive impairment, depression, and fatigue were associated with the priority level of the functionalities.
conclusionIn summary, our findings might contribute to a better adaptation of robotic assistants to the needs and expectations of the MS population.
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.