ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2023
Re-defining wearable robots: a multidisciplinary approach towards a unified terminology.
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 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.
- Towards a validated glossary of usability attributes for the evaluation of wearable robotic devices.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Effective communication is especially important in the wearable robots (WRs) community, which encloses a great variety of devices across different application domains, e.g., healthcare, occupational, and consumer. In this paper we present a vocabulary of terms with the aim to create a common understanding of terms and concepts among the different fields of expertise relevant in the WRs community. Our goal is to develop shared documentation that could serve as a reference to facilitate the use of accepted definitions in the field. The presented vocabulary is the result of different focus group discussions among experts in the field. The resulting document was then validated by presenting it to the WR community through an online survey. The results of the survey highlight a strong agreement in terms of acceptance of the vocabulary, its usefulness, and applicability of the proposed definitions as well as an overall appreciation for its purpose and target. This work represents a pilot study providing unique material for the WR community, encouraging the use of shared agreed definitions. The reported version of the vocabulary has been made available as a live document in a github repository, for public commenting and further improvements.
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.