Use of a Portable Assistive Glove to Facilitate Rehabilitation in Stroke Survivors With Severe Hand Impairment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment options for stroke survivors with severe hand impairment are limited. Active task practice can be restricted by difficulty in voluntarily activating finger muscles and interference from involuntary muscle excitation. We developed a portable, actuated glove-orthosis, which could be employed to address both issues. We hypothesized that combining passive cyclical stretching (reducing motoneuronal hyperexcitability) imposed by the device with active-assisted, task-oriented training (rehabilitating muscle activation) would improve upper extremity motor control and task performance post-stroke. Thirteen participants who experienced a stroke 2-6 months prior to enrollment completed 15 treatment sessions over five weeks. Each session involved cyclically stretching the long finger flexors (30 min) followed by active-assisted task-oriented movement practice (60 min). Outcome measures were completed at six intervals: three before and three after treatment initiation. Overall improvement in post-training scores was observed across all outcome measures, including the Graded Wolf Motor Function Test, Action Research Arm Test, and grip and pinch strength (p ≤ 0.02), except finger extension force. No significant change in spasticity was observed. Improvement in upper extremity capabilities is achievable for stroke survivors even with severe hand impairment through a novel intervention combining passive cyclical stretching and active-assisted task practice, a paradigm which could be readily incorporated into the clinic.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it