ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
User preference in the personalized control of an ankle prosthesis: a case study.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeUser preference is important for improving the acceptance of assistive robotic devices. However, it is not clear what factors influence user preferences or how it relates with physiological variables, such as muscle activity.
methodsThree participants with transfemoral amputation walked on a treadmill at a self-selected speed using a knee-ankle prosthesis. In four trials conducted on the same day, participants identified their preferred push-off parameters by self-tuning the magnitude and timing of the assistance using a 2D grid interface through a self-exploration method. They were blinded to the control parameters and relied on their perception of the assistance to guide the tuning. During these trials, muscle activity was recorded from four muscles in the sound limb. Muscle intensity and muscle synergies were calculated to explore the relation between muscle activity and user preference.
resultsWhile the participants generally preferred low to medium magnitudes of assistance, their preferred settings were not consistent across trials. In most trials these preferred settings were associated with lower muscle intensity in most muscles and better motor coordination.
conclusionThese findings suggest that physiological metrics, such as muscle intensity and muscle synergies, may influence the selection of preferred prosthesis settings. Even though user preference is likely influenced by multiple factors, such as gait symmetry, understanding the role of muscle activity and its relationship with preference could support the development of more personalized assistive robotic devices. However, further research is needed to confirm these observations and better explain how muscle activity contributes to participants’ preferred 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.