ArticlePLOS digital health2025
Use of assistive technology to assess distal motor function in subjects with neuromuscular disease.
Article in PLOS digital health, 2025. 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.
- Barriers and levers to using an app for motor function assessment by therapists in hospitals: A qualitative study of the MFM-Play app.PloS one · 2026Article
- Exploring Outcome Measures for Mitochondrial Myopathies; Insights From a Longitudinal Study on TK2 Deficiency.Journal of inherited metabolic disease · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Among the 32 items of the Motor Function Measure scale, 3 concern the assessment of hand function on a paper-based support. Their characteristics make it possible to envisage the use of a tablet instead of the original paper-based support for their completion. This would then make it possible to automate the score to reduce intra- and inter-individual variability. The main objective of the present study was to validate the digital completion of items 18, 19, and 22 by measuring the agreement of the scores obtained using a digital tablet with those obtained using the original paper-based support in children and adults with various neuromuscular diseases (NMD). The secondary objective is to calibrate an algorithm for the automatic items scoring.
designProspective, multicentre, non-interventional study.
methodsNinety-eight subjects aged 5 to 60 years with a confirmed NMD completed MFM items 18, 19, and 22 both on a paper support and a digital tablet.
resultsThe median age of included subjects was 16.2 years. Agreement between scores as assessed using the weighted Kappa coefficient was almost perfect for the scores of items 18 and 22 (K = 0.93, and 0.95, respectively) and substantial for item 19 (K = 0.70). In all cases of disagreement, the difference was of 1 point. The most frequent disagreement concerned item 19; mainly in the direction of a scoring of 1 point less on the tablet. An automatic analysis algorithm was tested on 82 recordings to suggest improvements.
conclusionThe switch from original paper-based support to the tablet results in minimal and acceptable differences, and maintains a valid and reproducible measure of the 3 items. The developed algorithm for automatic scoring appears feasible with the perspective to include them in a digital application that will make it easier to monitor patients.
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.