MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025244768 · doi:10.1097/npt.0b013e31820c4b00

Portable Neurorobotics for the Severely Affected Arm in Chronic Stroke

2011· article· en· W2025244768 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Stephen J. Page, Valerie Hill Hermann, Ela Lewis, Joel Stein, Jennifer DePeel

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurologic Physical Therapy · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronic strokeStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationMedicinePhysical therapyRehabilitationEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Few motor therapies increase active movement in the severely impaired arm of individuals with chronic stroke. Existing robotic devices to address this need are large and expensive. This case study describes the application and reports outcomes associated with a repetitive task-specific training (RTP) program incorporating a portable robotic device. We assessed outcomes related to affected arm impairment, ability to perform valued activities, satisfaction with movement performance, and quality of life in a participant with chronic stroke exhibiting severe arm hemiparesis. CASE DESCRIPTION: The participant was a 53-year-old man, 30 months after hemorrhagic stroke. At the time of enrollment, he exhibited some active shoulder and elbow flexion, but no active elbow extension, and no active movement at any joint below the elbow. INTERVENTION: The participant engaged in RTP incorporating a portable, electromyography-triggered neurorobotic device in 1-hour sessions, 3 days/week for 8 weeks using the affected arm. OUTCOMES: The upper extremity section of the Fugl-Meyer Impairment scale (FM), the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM), and the Stroke Impact Scale (SIS) were administered before and after training. After intervention, the subject exhibited reduced affected arm impairment (+2 points on the FM), increased ability to perform valued activities, increased satisfaction with performance of these activities (indicated by score increases of +2 and +1.8 points on the COPM Performance and Satisfaction scales, respectively), improved strength, performance of activities of daily living, hand function, participation, and physical function (as indicated by increases in respective SIS scores). DISCUSSION: The RTP incorporating the neurorobotic device appears promising. To our knowledge, this is the first study documenting a portable robotic-based RTP strategy in a person exhibiting this severity of hemiparesis.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score0.245

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.065
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurologic Physical TherapySame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207