ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Measurement of Hand Function by an Automated Device-System Validation and Usability Analysis.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advances in (Bio)Sensors for Physiological Monitoring: A Special Issue Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Aim: This study aims to assess the repeatability and accuracy of a 9-axis IMU-based glove and an IR camera system, in order to determine their potential to replace traditional goniometry. (2) Background: Traditional methods for assessing hand function, such as goniometry, are time-consuming and limited by subjectivity, inter-rater variability and external factors that compromise accuracy and reliability. Recent advancements in motion capture technology and sensor-based devices offer potential improvements in efficiency and accuracy for hand rehabilitation assessment; (3) Methods: To evaluate the repeatability of an IMU-based glove and an IR camera, measurements were taken using a silicone hand model under controlled conditions, while accuracy assessments involved a volunteer without movement constraints. Bland-Altman plots were employed for visual comparison and accuracy evaluation; (4) Results: The Nuada glove exhibited high repeatability, with standard deviations below two degrees across all joints, surpassing the goniometer's accuracy threshold of five degrees. The UltraLeap system demonstrated comparable repeatability, with deviations consistently under 3.5 degrees. Accuracy assessments revealed limitations: over 50% of the Nuada glove's measurements and over 80% of UltraLeap's measurements deviated by more than five degrees compared to the goniometer. However, the Nuada glove and UltraLeap system were more consistent with each other than with the goniometer, suggesting limitations in the goniometer's reliability for modern mobility assessment; (5) Conclusions: Both devices exhibited excellent repeatability, highlighting their strong potential for clinical application. However, their accuracy compared to the goniometer requires further refinement. These findings suggest that these technologies could enhance traditional assessment methods, offering more efficient and accurate solutions for evaluating hand mobility in clinical settings.
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.