ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2023
Testing and evaluation of lower limb prosthesis prototypes in people with a transfemoral amputation: a scoping review on research protocols.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2023. 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.
- User accommodation to an active microprocessor-controlled knee in individuals with unilateral transfemoral amputation: a 5-week non-randomized trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Comparisons of (cost-)effectiveness of manual, hybrid, and digital shape capture and shape design techniques for transtibial and transfemoral prosthetic sockets: A scoping review.Prosthetics and orthotics international · 2026Article
- Improving Amputee Endurance over Activities of Daily Living with a Robotic Knee-Ankle Prosthesis: A Case Study.Proceedings of the ... IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems · 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
backgroundWhen developing new lower limb prostheses, prototypes are tested to obtain insights into the performance. However, large variations between research protocols may complicate establishing the potential added value of newly developed prototypes over other prostheses.
objectiveThis review aims at identifying participant characteristics, research protocols, reference values, aims, and corresponding outcome measures used during prosthesis prototype testing on people with a transfemoral amputation.
methodsA systematic search was done on PubMed and Scopus from 2000 to December 2020. Articles were included if testing was done on adults with transfemoral or knee disarticulation amputation; testing involved walking with a non-commercially available prototype leg prosthesis consisting of at least a knee component; and included evaluations of the participants' functioning with the prosthesis prototype.
resultsFrom the initial search of 2027 articles, 48 articles were included in this review. 20 studies were single-subject studies and 4 studies included a cohort of 10 or more persons with a transfemoral amputation. Only 5 articles reported all the pre-defined participant characteristics that were deemed relevant. The familiarization time with the prosthesis prototype prior to testing ranged from 5 to 10 min to 3 months; in 25% of the articles did not mention the extent of the familiarization period. Mobility was most often mentioned as the development or testing aim. A total of 270 outcome measures were identified, kinetic/kinematic gait parameters were most often reported. The majority of outcome measures corresponded to the mobility aim. For 48% of the stated development aims and 4% of the testing aims, no corresponding outcome measure could be assigned. Results indicated large inconsistencies in research protocols and outcome measures used to validate pre-determined aims.
conclusionsThe large variation in prosthesis prototype testing and reporting calls for the development of a core set of reported participant characteristics, testing protocols, and specific and well-founded outcome measures, tailored to the various aims and development phases. The use of such a core set can give greater insights into progress of developments and determine which developments have additional benefits over the state-of-the-art. This review may contribute as initial input towards the development of such a core set.
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.