ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
FES-Cycling at the Cybathlon 2024: assessing accuracy of power-pedals for low power output in a virtual race scenario.
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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Cybathlon is a unique international competition platform for evaluating assistive technologies under real-life conditions. In the most recent edition, the FES-Cycling discipline was conducted on stationary smart trainers (Wahoo Kickr) within a virtual race environment. Participants could use either the smart trainer or a pedal-based power meter as the primary power source. As both systems were not specifically designed for the very low power outputs typically generated during FES-Cycling, the outcomes of the competition require careful interpretation.
methodsThis work summarizes the FES-Cycling competition at the Cybathlon 2024 and evaluates the accuracy of pedal-based power meters used in the virtual race. Race performance data from ten pilots representing eight international teams were analyzed. Pedal-based power measurements were compared against a validated smart trainer during the competition. In addition, an assessment in a controlled environment was conducted to quantify pedal accuracy in the low-power range (< 25 W) using a crank-based power meter as reference. The influence of pedal mounting torque, ankle-orthosis mounting position, and crank-length compensation was systematically investigated.
resultsFour of the ten pilots completed the full virtual race distance of 1960 m within the 8-min time limit. Mean cycling speeds (7.8-19.5 km/h) exceeded those reported for the over-ground Cybathlon 2016 race. Analysis of valid race segments revealed substantial overestimation of pedal-based power relative to the smart trainer, with relative errors ranging from 14.7 to 66.6%. Additional accuracy measurements confirmed that pedal-based power was sensitive to mounting torque and particularly to ankle-orthosis position, with lateral displacement of the foot causing pronounced overestimation. Crank-length compensation reduced systematic bias, but residual errors and increased variability persisted at higher cadences.
conclusionCommercially available pedal-based power meters and stationary smart trainers are currently not well suited for reliable performance assessment in low-power FES-Cycling competitions within virtual race environments. While virtual formats offer clear logistical advantages, engaging training opportunities and rich performance data, traditional race formats should be reconsidered to better align with the functional goals of FES-Cycling. Future competitions should prioritize over-ground cycling, assessing externally observable outcomes such as distance and time, which may further enhance pilot motivation and public visibility.
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.