ArticleIEEE ... International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics : [proceedings]2025
Optimizing Cross-Modal Matching for Multimodal Motor Rehabilitation.
Article in IEEE ... International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics : [proceedings], 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stroke often causes sensorimotor deficits, impairing hand dexterity and disrupting independence for millions worldwide. While rehabilitation devices leveraging visual and haptic feedback show promise, their effectiveness is limited by a lack of perceptual equity, which is necessary to ensure fair comparisons between sensory modalities. This study refines cross-modal matching protocols to address this gap, enabling unbiased evaluation of multimodal feedback. Using the Hand Articulation and Neurotraining Device (HAND), 12 healthy participants matched visual and haptic stimuli in a structured task. A streamlined protocol, requiring just $2-3$ blocks and 3 reference intensities, reduced experimental time fivefold while preserving data integrity. Data were analyzed using linear and exponential models applied to both full and reduced datasets. The results demonstrated consistent participant performance across trials, with higher matching errors at greater stimulus intensities, likely attributable to sensory saturation effects. Furthermore, the study offered practical methodological insights, including the use of reduced data sampling paradigms to enhance experimental efficiency significantly while preserving data integrity. This work advances perceptual equity in multisensory feedback systems, addressing sensory encoding variability to support scalable, personalized therapeutic strategies for stroke recovery.
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.