Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38809995›Full record

ArticleScience robotics2024

Evaluating initial usability of a hand augmentation device across a large and diverse sample.

Dani Clode, Lucy Dowdall, Edmund da Silva, Klara Selén, Dorothy Cowie, Giulia Dominijanni, Tamar R Makin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science robotics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Presence Is Reality: Rethinking Virtual and Real-World Consciousness.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Dani ClodeMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9388-2599
Lucy DowdallMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1312-5702
Edmund da SilvaMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Klara SelénMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0009-0004-6760-0390
Dorothy CowieDepartment of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2601-369X
Giulia DominijanniMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4271-1359
Tamar R MakinMRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5816-8979

Funding

European Research Council 715022Medical Research Council MC_UU_00030/10Wellcome Trust 215575
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advancement of motor augmentation and the broader domain of human-machine interaction rely on a seamless integration with users' physical and cognitive capabilities. These considerations may markedly fluctuate among individuals on the basis of their age, form, and abilities. There is a need to develop a standard for considering these diversity needs and preferences to guide technological development, and large-scale testing can provide us with evidence for such considerations. Public engagement events provide an important opportunity to build a bidirectional discourse with potential users for the codevelopment of inclusive and accessible technologies. We exhibited the Third Thumb, a hand augmentation device, at a public engagement event and tested participants from the general public, who are often not involved in such early technological development of wearable robotic technology. We focused on wearability (fit and control), ability to successfully operate the device, and ability levels across diversity factors relevant for physical technologies (gender, handedness, and age). Our inclusive design was successful in 99.3% of our diverse sample of 596 individuals tested (age range from 3 to 96 years). Ninety-eight percent of participants were further able to successfully manipulate objects using the extra thumb during the first minute of use, with no significant influences of gender, handedness, or affinity for hobbies involving the hands. Performance was generally poorer among younger children (aged ≤11 years). Although older and younger adults performed the task comparably, we identified age costs with the older adults. Our findings offer tangible demonstration of the initial usability of the Third Thumb for a broad demographic.

Indexed as

HandRoboticsAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolEquipment DesignFemaleHumansMaleMan-Machine SystemsMiddle AgedThumbWearable Electronic Devices

Identifiers

PMID38809995
PMCPMC7616312

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.