ArticlePeerJ2024
Temporal localization of upper extremity bilateral synergistic coordination using wearable accelerometers.
Article in PeerJ, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: The human upper extremity is characterized by inherent motor abundance, allowing a diverse array of tasks with agility and adaptability. Upper extremity functional limitations are a common sequela to Stroke, resulting in pronounced motor and sensory impairments in the contralesional arm. While many therapeutic interventions focus on rehabilitating the weaker arm, it is increasingly evident that it is necessary to consider bimanual coordination and motor control. Methods: Participants were recruited to two groups differing in age (Group 1 ( Findings: Acceleration data revealed task-specific movement features during the three distinct tasks. Groups demonstrated diminished similarity as task complexity increased. Groups differed significantly in the hand segments during the buttoning task, with Group 1 showing no coordination in the hand segments during buttoning, and strong coordination in reaching each button with the upper arm and forearm guiding extension. Group 2's dissimilarity scores and percentages of similarity indicated longer periods of inter-limb coordination, particularly towards movement completion. Group 1's dissimilarity scores and percentages of similarity indicated longer periods of intra-limb coordination, particularly in the coordination of the upper arm and forearm segments. Interpretation: The Expanding Procrustes methodology can be applied to compute objective coordination scores using accessible and highly accurate wearable acceleration sensors. The findings of task duration, angular velocity, and peak roll angle are supported by previous studies finding older individuals to present with slower movements, reduced movement stability, and a reduction of laterality between the limbs. The theory of a shift towards ambidexterity with age is supported by the finding of greater inter-limb coordination in the group of subjects above the age of thirty-five. The group below the age of thirty was found to demonstrate longer periods of intra-limb coordination, with upper arm and forearm coordination emerging as a possible explanation for the demonstrated greater stability.
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.