ArticleHuman factors2026
Evaluating the Feasibility of EMG-Based Human-Machine Interfaces for Driving.
Article in Human factors, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
ObjectiveTo evaluate the feasibility of electromyography (EMG)-based human-machine interfaces (HMIs) for high-demand activities such as driving based on performance, cognitive workload, usability, and safety measures.BackgroundUpper-limb amputees face challenges in performing everyday tasks, including driving. EMG-based HMIs offer potential solutions, particularly for wrist disarticulated and trans-radial amputee, but their effectiveness in complex tasks like driving requires further investigation.MethodNineteen able-bodied participants completed a driving simulation study using an EMG-based HMI, dominant hand, and both hands. Participants performed various driving maneuvers including straight lane driving, overtaking, and 90-degree turns at intersections. Driver performance, cognitive workload (measured by blink rate and subjective measures), usability (USE questionnaire), and safety were assessed.ResultsUsing the EMG-based HMI led to higher lane offset and steering angle compared to conventional methods, but demonstrated lower steering entropy in some situations. Cognitive workload was higher for EMG-based HMI, while usability scores were lower. Safety measures were mixed, with EMG-based HMI showing better performance at intersections but lower lane offset and steering angle safety scores overall.ConclusionThe study highlights both limitations and opportunities presented by EMG-based HMIs in high-demand tasks such as driving. While the system exhibited lower performance in some conditions, it demonstrated potential for controlled driving, particularly during specific maneuvers. The higher cognitive workload and lower usability scores indicate areas for improvement.ApplicationThe findings provide valuable insights for the development of more effective EMG-based HMIs, supporting future research and clinical trials aimed at enhancing mobility and independence for individuals with upper-limb amputations.
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.