SynthesisJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2025
Configuration design of ankle rehabilitation robots: a systematic review and future prospects.
Synthesis in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Compared to traditional therapist-assisted rehabilitation training, ankle rehabilitation robots (ARRs) can offer a wider variety of active and passive training strategies for stroke and fracture patients. This enhances patient recovery outcomes and efficiency while reducing physical exertion for therapists, thereby conserving rehabilitation medical resources. This paper first summarizes the current research status on the equivalent models of the human ankle, aiming to better reproduce its motion functions in the development of ARRs. Secondly, it systematically retrieves and screens literature on the configuration design of ARRs from databases including Web of Science, Engineering Village, and IEEE Xplore. Thirdly, from the perspective of configuration design, the existing ARRs are divided into five categories: based on classical parallel mechanisms, with spherical pair or universal joint limb, based on remote center-of-motion mechanisms, human-machine compatible types, and other types. Finally, the characteristics of each ARR category are summarized, the current challenges and future prospects faced by ARRs are highlighted, and the limitations of this paper are also discussed. This paper systematically reviews the research status of configuration design of ARRs, pointing out that shortcomings still exist in areas such as human-machine compatibility. Future efforts should further integrate the biomechanical characteristics of the ankle to deepen innovative design of human-machine compatible configurations.
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.