ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2025
Haptic communication and interpersonal dynamics in hand-by-hand guided locomotion in children and adults.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 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.
- Sophisticated use of upper limb haptic interactions during adaptive locomotion.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Neurodevelopmental trajectories from birth to childhood and their impairments: insights from passive, spontaneous, and locomotor-like movements.Frontiers in neurologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aim: Understanding how haptic interaction supports interpersonal coordination during locomotion is important to develop assistive technologies when necessary. While significant work has been done on haptic interactions during adult locomotion, little is known about how children interact between each other or with an adult during walking. Here, we studied haptic-guided locomotion in children and adults. Methods: We examined 11 pairs (adult-adult, child-child [6-8 years old], and adult-child) walking side by side with hand contact toward targets, with one participant leading and one blindfolded follower. The walking path was either straight or curved. We recorded and analysed upper limb muscle electromyography, kinematics, and haptic interaction forces. Results and conclusion: All dyads (adult-adult, child-child, adult-child) showed relatively small interaction forces (around 3 N), which presumably function primarily as communicative cues rather than as direct mechanical drivers of movement of the partner. Gait initiation involved compliant interaction in all dyads, with frequent anterior deltoid shortening reactions aiding arm elevation and movement onset, particularly prominent in adult-child pairs. During curved locomotion, small direction-specific adjustments in force (2-3 N) and arm elevation (3-4) conveyed effective haptic cues across ages. In addition, we found clear age-related features in the haptic interaction. Adults reduced upper-limb compliance when guiding children as compared with guiding another adult. However, children were systematically more compliant when interacting with adults, irrespective of their role, leader or follower. We interpret this difference as indicating that adults emphasize precise control and interaction stability, whereas children display more variable and reactive motor behaviour. The latter behaviour may reflect the need of children to learn and explore while walking in tandem. However, it may also reflect a compliance control that is different from that of adults. Limitations: The sample size and children age range were limited. Moreover, we only included female adults.
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.