ArticleDigital health
Upper limb kinematic measurement using markerless motion capturing (MMC) in stroke survivors: A cross-sectional experimental study.
Article in Digital health. 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.
- Article
- Vision-based vs. IMU-based upper-limb pose estimation in assisted dressing: a comparative study of positional accuracy and kinematic fidelity.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Markerless motion capture (MMC) technology has emerged as a clinical tool to assess the physical performance of patients. This study evaluates: (a) differences in upper limb joint angles between stroke survivors with different functional levels and their healthy counterparts in controlled indoor and uncontrolled outdoor environments; and (b) the relationship between the kinematic information obtained by the MMC system and the scores of manual motor assessments. Methods: A customized MMC system using an iPad Pro captured the participants' movements. Stroke survivors underwent three upper limb assessments and performed seven sets of upper limb tasks with their non-affected side, followed by their affected side. Healthy participants performed the same tasks with their dominant and non-dominant sides. The sensitivity and specificity of the machine models were calculated for classifying upper limb motor function levels using kinematic data from the MMC system. Results: Fifty stroke survivors and 49 healthy adults were recruited. Significant differences were found between the affected and non-affected sides of stroke participants in most tasks. Significant positive correlations were found between the results of the manual motor assessments and most of the kinematic parameters. The results of the four selected machine learning models revealed ≥0.85 sensitivity in the stroke upper limb functional level classification. Conclusion: The MMC system and machine learning algorithms provide accurate data for evaluating upper limb recovery in stroke survivors. Further research is needed to explore the use of the MMC system by stroke survivors at home during remote therapy.
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.