ArticlePloS one2022
The effects of robotic assistance on upper limb spatial muscle synergies in healthy people during planar upper-limb training.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessing Transparency of Robots, Exoskeletons, and Assistive Devices: A Systematic Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- A muscle synergy-based method to improve robot-assisted movements.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Muscle synergies in upper limb stroke rehabilitation: a scoping review.European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine · 2024Article
- Muscle synergies for evaluating upper limb in clinical applications: A systematic review.Heliyon · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRobotic rehabilitation is a commonly adopted technique used to restore motor functionality of neurological patients. However, despite promising results were achieved, the effects of human-robot interaction on human motor control and the recovery mechanisms induced with robot assistance can be further investigated even on healthy subjects before translating to clinical practice. In this study, we adopt a standard paradigm for upper-limb rehabilitation (a planar device with assistive control) with linear and challenging curvilinear trajectories to investigate the effect of the assistance in human-robot interaction in healthy people.
methodsTen healthy subjects were instructed to perform a large set of radial and curvilinear movements in two interaction modes: 1) free movement (subjects hold the robot handle with no assistance) and 2) assisted movement (with a force tunnel assistance paradigm). Kinematics and EMGs from representative upper-limb muscles were recorded to extract phasic muscle synergies. The free and assisted interaction modes were compared assessing the level of assistance, error, and muscle synergy comparison between the two interaction modes.
resultsIt was found that in free movement error magnitude is higher than with assistance, proving that task complexity required assistance also on healthy controls. Moreover, curvilinear tasks require more assistance than standard radial paths and error is higher. Interestingly, while assistance improved task performance, we found only a slight modification of phasic synergies when comparing assisted and free movement.
conclusionsWe found that on healthy people, the effect of assistance was significant on task performance, but limited on muscle synergies. The findings of this study can find applications for assessing human-robot interaction and to design training to maximize motor recovery.
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.