ArticleScience and engineering ethics2026
Implications for Care Relationships in Technology-Supported Stroke Rehabilitation: A Qualitative Interview Study.
Article in Science and engineering ethics, 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
This study explores how technology-supported rehabilitation reshapes the relationships between patients and therapists. Additionally, it examines how empirical findings can inform early design decisions. Qualitative interviews with patients and therapists identified their perceptions of PhysioMio, a wearable sensor-based rehabilitation device that detects muscle activity to monitor rehabilitation progress and enable independent home-based training. Adapting an ethics of care perspective, we focus on the significance of therapeutic relationships when discussing ethical nuances that emerge with the introduction of technology. Our findings show that, while patients value enhanced opportunities for agency and involvement, they do not seek full detachment from therapists. The successful integration of technology into rehabilitation hinges on strong, trust-based relationships, in which therapists take on an expanded role as contextual evaluators. This illustrates that rather than replace physical therapists, technology demands them to assume new roles. While participants generally prioritized purposeful and beneficial data collection over abstract privacy concerns, this acceptance was challenged when monitoring risked shifting therapists' roles toward judging supervisors. Visualizing the rehabilitation process through data raised fears of information overload and sparked mixed reactions regarding motivation and peer comparisons. These insights influenced design choices, including tailoring data granularity to specific purposes and reassessing whether comparative feedback supports or undermines motivation. In conclusion, the ethical use of technology to support recovery and strengthen care relationships must be embedded within trusting therapeutic relationships, and adapted attentively and responsibly to the individual's context, needs, abilities and values.
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.