ArticleJournal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineering
Design requirements of upper extremity supports for daily use in Duchenne muscular dystrophy with severe muscle weakness.
Article in Journal of rehabilitation and assistive technologies engineering. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review of upper extremity passive joint impedance identification in people with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Review
- The Design of the Dummy Arm: A Verification Tool for Arm Exoskeleton Development.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: People with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) cope with progressive muscular weakness and consequential upper extremity function loss. They benefit from arm supports, or arm exoskeletons, to assist arm function. Especially for severe muscle weakness (DMD ≥ Brooke Scale 4), the design of such arm support is challenging. This study aims to structurally develop functional and technical design requirements of arm supports for people with DMD Brooke Scale 4. Methods: An overview of clinical characteristics and a classification of clinically meaningful activities were derived from data from the Dutch Dystrophinopathy Database and available literature. Based on these, functional and technical design requirements of arm supports were developed and matched to the achievable needs of the user. Results: First, the clinical characteristics of the target population, such as strength, range of motion, and functional ability, are given. Next, clinically relevant activities of daily living are translated to functional requirements categorised in a 'must,' 'should,' and 'could' category. Last, the technical requirements to realise these functional goals are presented. Conclusions: The recommendations following from the functional user needs, technical requirements, and safety considerations can be used to make the development of assistive arm supports for people with DMD Brooke Scale 4 more user-centred.
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.