Robot-Assisted Therapy Influence on Kinematic and EMG Activity in the Upper Limb for Children with Cerebral Palsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To develop an index for quantitative assessment of the upper limb motor function in children with cerebral palsy before and after robot-assisted therapy. Method: An upper limb motor function index was developed using kinematic, surface electromyography and three-axis inertial measurements unit data collected from 15 children with cerebral palsy (CP) and 15 typically developed children. Children with CP underwent 18 robot-assisted therapy sessions with the REAplan device. All children were evaluated, using kinematic data from the REAplan, electromyography and three-axis inertial measurements unit readings from its accelerometer. A principal component analysis was conducted to produce an evaluation index, which is able to detect the deviation from the upper limb motor function of typically developing children group. Children with CP were evaluated twice before and after the intervention with Box and Blocks test and Finger-To-Nose test. The discriminative and concurrent validity of the upper limb motor function index were investigated. Results: The upper limb motor function index was higher in children with CP post therapy (p<0.001). Finger-To-Nose test values improved after robot-assisted therapy (p<0.03). A weak but positive correlation was observed between upper limb motor function index and clinical tests (r=0.012, p=0.95 and r=0.13, p= 0.54 for Box and Blocks test and Finger-To-Nose test respectively). Interpretation: The upper limb motor function index successfully differentiated between the typically developing children and children with CP and was effective in assessing the improvement of the upper limb motor function after robot-assisted therapy. The upper limb motor function index could be extended to assess and monitor rehabilitation therapies of other populations, such as those with stroke and Parkinson’s disease.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".