Trial reportAnnals of biomedical engineering2026
Are Isokinetic Torque-Angle Models Derived from Healthy Subjects Applicable to Patients with Upper-Limb Neurological Motor Impairment?
Trial report in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06608121 (Study for the Development and Evaluation of Personalised Muscle Effort Generation Models for Patients With Upper Limb Motor Deficits), which is not on this 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.
Study for the Development and Evaluation of Personalised Muscle Effort Generation Models for Patients With Upper Limb Motor Deficits
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUpper-limb motor impairments are common and affect quality of life. Shared-control robotic assistance systems driven by patients' residual effort generation capacities are being developed. These systems require the integration, into their control scheme, of knowledge about the maximum voluntary torque achievable by patients at each joint angle. This study aimed to quantify the performance of simplified mathematical models primarily developed to fit healthy individuals' torque-angle curves, as candidates for integration in the control scheme.
methods15 patients (6F, 9M, 62.7 ± 14.4 years) hospitalized in a French rehabilitation center for stroke (n = 10), multiple sclerosis (n = 4), or traumatic tetraplegia (n = 1) were included. Passive, then maximum concentric and eccentric torques were measured in the seated position, in shoulder external-internal rotation and in elbow flexion-extension, at an imposed speed of 30°/s, using a Con-Trex® isokinetic ergometer.
resultsThe normalized RMSE between modeled and experimental curves was 3.1 ± 2.0% of corresponding peak torques. Univariate linear models displayed no difference in nRMSE between mathematical models, but differences across patients (p < 0.001, R
conclusionRegardless of the mathematical model used, torque-angle curve modeling was globally less effective than that for healthy individuals, while still allowing consideration for future use for robotic assistance for the majority of patients. Further investigation of patient-related factors affecting model quality will be necessary to assess results' generalizability. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ID-RCB: 2024-A01007-40, clinicaltrial.gov ID: NCT06608121.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41724899What 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.