ArticleIEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society2026
Advancing Wearable-Based Upper-Limb Stroke Recovery Assessment to the Clinic: A Comparison of Movement Segmentation Strategies.
Article in IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Continuous, objective, and precise upper-limb motor assessments are essential for realizing the vision of precision rehabilitation for stroke survivors. Wearable inertial sensors have emerged as a promising solution, enabling the analysis of motor performance in real-world settings. Recent studies have introduced two movement segmentation methods-anatomical segmentation and linear segmentation-for processing wearable inertial data to monitor post-stroke upper-limb motor recovery, each grounded in distinct theories of motor control and behavior. These methods differ in their practical implications for clinical use: linear segmentation requires only a single wearable device on the stroke-affected wrist, while anatomical segmentation necessitates an additional sensor on the sternum. This study seeks to systematically compare the clinimetric performance of these two approaches, taking into account their differences in practicality, to provide insights into their effective integration into clinical practice. 17 stroke survivors were equipped with inertial sensors on the trunk and the stroke-affected wrist while performing activities of daily living in a simulated apartment setting. Acceleration time-series from wrist movements were decomposed into movement segments using each movement segmentation approach. Reliable features were extracted from the movement segments, and supervised regression models were trained to establish concurrent validity against existing clinical measures. Anatomical segmentation demonstrated strong concurrent validity against existing clinical measures but may face challenges for continuous use due to the need for multiple sensors. Linear segmentation, on the other hand, provided slightly reduced but acceptable performance in motor deficit assessment while offering the advantage of requiring only a single wrist-worn sensor.
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.