ArticleScientific reports2026
Intuitive therapist robot patient physical interaction is worth a thousand words.
Article in Scientific reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Robotic systems can enhance the amount and repeatability of physical guided motor training. Yet their real-world adoption is limited, partly due to non-intuitive trainer/therapist-trainee/patient interactions. To address this gap, we present a haptic teleoperation system for trainers to remotely guide and monitor the movements of a trainee wearing an arm exoskeleton. The trainer can physically interact with the exoskeleton through a commercial handheld haptic device via virtual contact points at the exoskeleton's elbow and wrist, allowing intuitive guidance. Thirty-two participants tested the system in a trainer-trainee paradigm, comparing our haptic demonstration system with conventional visual demonstration in guiding trainees in executing arm poses. Quantitative analyses showed that haptic demonstration significantly reduced movement completion time and improved smoothness, while speech analysis-using large language models for automated transcription and categorization of verbal commands-revealed fewer verbal instructions. The haptic demonstration did not result in higher reported mental and physical effort by trainers compared to the visual demonstration, while trainers reported greater competence and trainees lower physical demand. These findings support the feasibility of our proposed interface for effective remote human-robot physical interaction. Future work should assess its usability and efficacy for clinical populations in restoring clinicians' sense of agency during robot-assisted therapy.
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.