ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2023
User Experience Evaluation of Upper Limb Rehabilitation Robots: Implications for Design Optimization: A Pilot Study.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 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.
- Formative Evaluation of Safety and Usability of a Mixed-Reality Robot-Assisted Telerehabilitation System for Post-Stroke Upper-Limb Therapy.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Passive and Active Exoskeleton Solutions: Sensors, Actuators, Applications, and Recent Trends.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Review
- Usability evaluation of a smart upper limb rehabilitation exercise device for individuals with disabilities.Journal of exercise 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the development of science and technology, people are trying to use robots to assist in stroke rehabilitation training. This study aims to analyze the result of the formative test to provide the orientation of upper limb rehabilitation robot design optimization. We invited 21 physical therapists (PTs) and eight occupational therapists (OTs) who had no experience operating any upper limb rehabilitation robots before, and 4 PTs and 1 OT who had experience operating upper limb rehabilitation robots. Data statistics use the Likert scale. The general group scored 3.5 for safety-related topics, while the experience group scored 4.5. In applicability-related questions, the main function score was 2.3 in the general group and 2.4 in the experience group; and the training trajectory score was 3.5 in the general group and 5.0 in the experience group. The overall ease of use score was 3.1 in the general group and 3.6 in the experience group. There was no statistical difference between the two groups. The methods to retouch the trajectory can be designed through the feedback collected in the formative test and gathering further detail in the next test. Further details about the smooth trajectory must be confirmed in the next test. The optimization of the recording process is also important to prevent users from making additional effort to know it well.
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.