ArticleArchives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation2026
Toward Automation of Motor Assessments in Stroke: Proof-of-Concept Model to Interpret Balance and Gait in Patients With Stroke.
Article in Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of automated action recognition and movement characterization during the Performance-Oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA) using markerless three-dimensional pose estimation and to explore whether data-driven whole-body movement analysis differentiates healthy adults from stroke survivors. Design: Observational, cross-sectional proof-of-concept study. Setting: Single-center study conducted at a UK National Health Service Hospital stroke unit. Participants: Fifty-six healthy adults and 17 stroke survivors able to complete the POMA assessment (N=73). Intervention: Participants completed the POMA under therapist supervision while recorded using 2 synchronized RGB cameras. Major joints were extracted to generate skeletal representations, which were analyzed using machine-learning methods to automatically detect distinct POMA actions. Main Outcome Measures: Primary outcomes were overall action recognition accuracy and F1 scores for individual POMA actions. Secondary outcomes included qualitative and quantitative differences in movement patterns between healthy participants and participants with stroke derived from whole-body kinematic embeddings. Results: The action recognition model achieved a mean classification accuracy of 78.9%. Performance was highest for sitting, standing, and turning, with F1 scores of 0.95, 0.82, and 0.80, respectively. Low-dimensional embeddings of movement trajectories revealed distinct clustering patterns and greater dispersion among participants stroke, consistent with impaired balance and gait control. Conclusions: Markerless pose estimation combined with machine-learning analysis can accurately recognize actions and detect clinically meaningful differences in movement during a standardized balance and gait assessment. Although exploratory, these findings illustrate the potential of artificial intelligence to characterize movement patterns and identify kinematic features distinguishing patient groups. This approach offers a pathway toward scalable, objective, and automated motor assessment, with the potential to identify patients at risk of functional decline and support targeted clinical interventions.
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.