ArticleBrain sciences2024
Integrating Machine Learning with Robotic Rehabilitation May Support Prediction of Recovery of the Upper Limb Motor Function in Stroke Survivors.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Do predictors of motor recovery differ between robotic and conventional post-stroke rehabilitation?Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Ten Recommendations for Improving Research on Stroke Motor Rehabilitation: A Unified Perspective.Restorative neurology and neuroscience · 2026Review
- A multimodal machine learning approach to forecast upper limb motor recovery after stroke using kinematic and electromyographic data - A pilot-study.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Data-driven analysis of Armeo Spring performance across neurological disorders: implications for personalized upper limb neurorehabilitation.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2026Article
- Toward Precision Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Medicine: Integrating Molecular, Imaging, and Computational Biomarkers for Functional Outcome Prediction.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motor impairment is a common issue in stroke patients, often affecting the upper limbs. To this standpoint, robotic neurorehabilitation has shown to be highly effective for motor function recovery. Notably, Machine learning (ML) may be a powerful technique able to identify the optimal kind and intensity of rehabilitation treatments to maximize the outcomes. This retrospective observational research aims to assess the efficacy of robotic devices in facilitating the functional rehabilitation of upper limbs in stroke patients through ML models. Specifically, clinical scales, such as the Fugl-Meyer Assessment (A-D) (FMA), the Frenchay Arm Test (FAT), and the Barthel Index (BI), were used to assess the patients' condition before and after robotic therapy. The values of these scales were predicted based on the patients' clinical and demographic data obtained before the treatment. The findings showed that ML models have high accuracy in predicting the FMA, FAT, and BI, with R-squared (R
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.