ArticleIEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine2025
Quantification of Motor Learning in Hand Adjustability Movements: An Evaluation Variable for Discriminant Cognitive Decline.
Article in IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveMild cognitive impairment (MCI) is characterized by early symptoms of attentional decline and may be distinguished through motor learning results. A relationship was reported between dexterous hand movements and cognitive function in older adults. Therefore, this study focuses on motor learning involving dexterous hand movements. As motor learning engages two distinct types of attention, external and internal, we aimed to develop an evaluation method that separates these attentional functions within motor learning. The objective of this study was to develop and verify the effectiveness of this evaluation method. The effectiveness was assessed by comparing two motor learning variables between a normal cognitive (NC) and MCI groups.
methodTo evaluate motor learning through dexterous hand movements, we utilized the iWakka device. Two types of visual tracking tasks, repeat and random, were designed to evaluate motor learning from different aspects. The tracking errors in both tasks were quantitatively measured, and the initial and final improvement rates during motor learning were defined as the evaluation variables. The study included 28 MCI participants and 40 NC participants, and the effectiveness of the proposed method was verified by comparing results between the groups.
resultsThe repeat task revealed a significantly lower learning rate in MCI participants (p <0.01). In contrast, no significant difference was observed between MCI and NC participants in the random task (p =0.67).
conclusionThe evaluation method proposed in this study demonstrated the possibility of obtaining evaluation variables that indicate the characteristics of MCI. CLINICAL IMPACT: The methods proposed in this work are clinically relevant because the proposed evaluation system can make evaluation variables for discriminating cognitive decline in MCI. That it, the proposed approach can also be used to provide discrimination for cognitive decline in MCI.
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.