ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
A pressure-based motion intention recognition strategy for phase-specific knee exoskeleton assistance during sit-to-stand.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The sit-to-stand (STS) task is a fundamental functional movement requiring substantial lower-limb joint torque and coordinated neuromuscular control. The knee joint plays a dominant role in generating extensor torque during the body elevation phase. However, existing exoskeleton assistive strategies often lack alignment with the temporal characteristics of joint mechanical demand, limiting their effectiveness. Methods: Thirteen healthy male participants performed STS tasks under both non-assisted and exoskeleton-assisted conditions. A pressure-based motion intention recognition method was developed using anterior thigh pressure signals to detect movement onset. Three assistive torque levels (3.0 Nm, 4.5 Nm, and 6.0 Nm) were applied to the knee joint. Kinematic and kinetic data were collected using a motion capture system and force plates, and knee joint moment, power, and mechanical work were calculated to evaluate biomechanical changes. Results: Recognition-performance analysis showed that the pressure-threshold algorithm identified the target pre-extension trigger in all six validation recordings, corresponding to a positive-event detection rate of 100% (6/6). The detected trigger occurred at 0.49 ± 0.05 of the pressure-rising phase, and the onset of assistive torque occurred within 0.072 s of knee-extension onset, advancing torque output by approximately 0.228 s compared with a kinematics-only trigger. Because the validation trials included intentional STS attempts only, specificity and overall classification accuracy against non-intention events were not estimated in the present study. Knee joint moment exhibited a clear phase-dependent pattern, characterized by a rapid increase following seat-off and a peak during the body elevation phase. Compared with the control condition, exoskeleton assistance significantly reduced mean and peak knee joint moment under the 4.5 Nm and 6.0 Nm conditions (p < 0.0167). Joint power and total mechanical work were also significantly reduced across assisted conditions. These reductions were observed in healthy young male participants performing a standardized laboratory STS task. Conclusions: In healthy young male participants under controlled laboratory conditions, knee joint mechanical demand during STS was strongly phase-dependent, and assistance aligned with this temporal structure reduced knee joint loading. The pressure-based intention recognition method provided a practical approach for improving system responsiveness during this standardized task. However, these findings should be interpreted as preliminary biomechanical evidence obtained from healthy participants, rather than direct evidence of clinical efficacy. Further studies involving older adults, patients with functional impairments, and real-world testing conditions are required before clinical or rehabilitation applications can be inferred.
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.