ArticlePloS one2026
Augmented reality for advanced prosthetic training in non-amputees.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Prosthetic abandonment is highly prevalent among upper extremity amputees (UEA), partly due to lack of engaging and motivating training to use their devices. Augmented reality (AR) systems can be used for rehabilitation, and are advantageous because they offer stimulating, goal-oriented experiences for participants to immerse themselves in while performing repetitive tasks to improve function. Thus, in this study, the effects of a novel AR prosthetic training game, and the transfer of skills to a functional rehabilitation performance assessment involving tasks of daily living were investigated. Thirty-two able-bodied participants, sixteen allocated to receive AR training and sixteen received no training, donned a bypass body-powered prosthetic device to engage in a functional task assessment, evaluated at two time points. The AR group used the bypass prosthesis to engage in the AR training game, ARm-Strong, on each of three training sessions. AR group participants completed a questionnaire at the end of the intervention to evaluate their feelings on the AR game. On average, individuals in the AR group were significantly more efficient at using the bypass prosthesis to complete functional tasks compared to the control group, however, the rate of improvement was similar between groups. Individuals who engaged in the AR training felt positive feelings of engagement, engrossment, and immersion towards the application although the impression of immersion was significantly less than that of engagement and engrossment. The results of this study support previous findings that AR training is an engaging and motivating experience, and motor learning can be achieved through this type of training. Future implications of the results may benefit prosthesis users by enhancing user experience during prosthetic training and ultimately lead to better rehabilitation and overall adherence to the use of the prosthetic device.
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.