Initial Testing of Robotic Exoskeleton Hand Device for Stroke Rehabilitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The preliminary test results of a novel robotic hand rehabilitation device aimed at treatment for the loss of motor abilities in the fingers and thumb due to stroke are presented. This device has been developed in collaboration with physiotherapists who regularly treat individuals who have suffered from a stroke. The device was tested on healthy adults to ensure comfort, user accessibility, and repeatability for various hand sizes in preparation for obtaining permission from regulatory bodies and implementing the design in a full clinical trial. Trials were conducted with 52 healthy individuals ranging in age from 19 to 93 with an average age of 58. A comfort survey and force data ANOVA were performed to measure hand motions and ensure the repeatability and accessibility of the system. Readings from the force sensor (p < 0.05) showed no significant difference between repetitions for each participant. All subjects considered the device comfortable. The device scored a mean comfort value of 8.5/10 on all comfort surveys and received the approval of all physiotherapists involved. The device has satisfied all design specifications, and the positive results of the participants suggest that it can be considered safe and reliable. It can therefore be moved forward for clinical trials with post-stroke users.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".