ArticleNeurorehabilitation and neural repair2026
Robotic Technologies for Hand Recovery After Stroke: A Reflection on Research Paths in Honor of Dr. Steven Wolf.
Article in Neurorehabilitation and neural repair, 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past 35 years, my work has focused on developing and studying robotic technologies to promote hand and arm recovery after stroke. In this Point-of-View, written for a special issue honoring Steven L. Wolf, I reflect on the personal and theoretical factors that shaped my research path, and how they intersect with Steve's pioneering contributions to stroke rehabilitation. I first provide a brief overview of the personal factors that influenced my research journey. Then, I turn to theoretical factors, highlighting conceptual synergies between Constraint-Induced Movement Therapy (CIMT) and robot-assisted therapy, including the principles of dose, task-specific training, shaping, prevention of slacking, participant selection, and the critical role of proprioception. Finally, I discuss 5 implications for future directions in robotic therapy consistent with Dr. Wolf's vision of intensive, patient-centered, and mechanistically grounded therapy: (1) the use of shared principles from CIMT and robot-assisted therapy to guide the design of advanced rehabilitation technologies; (2) precision rehabilitation that prioritizes proprioception; (3) the design of practical, widely adoptable robotic systems; (4) the development of real-time biomarkers and closed-loop training systems that optimize recovery; and (5) the need for deeper collaboration with people with lived experience of disability to address unsolved challenges. Steve's impactful results, driven by his curiosity, rigor, and openness to diverse approaches, have profoundly influenced my career, the ideas I present here, and the broader field of robotic therapy.
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.