Interactive Electronic Pegboard for Enhancing Manual Dexterity and Cognitive Abilities: Instrument Usability Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Strokes pose a substantial health burden, impacting 1 in 6 people globally. One-tenth of patients will endure a second, often more severe, stroke within a year. Alarmingly, a younger demographic is being affected due to recent lifestyle changes. As fine motor and cognitive issues arise, patient disability as well as the strain on caregivers and health care resources is exacerbated. Contemporary occupational therapy assesses manual dexterity and cognitive functions through object manipulation and pen-and-paper recordings. However, these assessments are typically isolated, which makes it challenging for therapists to comprehensively evaluate specific patient conditions. Furthermore, the reliance on one-on-one training and assessment approaches on manual documentation is inefficient and prone to transcription errors. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the feasibility of using an interactive electronic pegboard for stroke rehabilitation in clinical settings. METHODS: A total of 10 patients with a history of stroke and 10 healthy older individuals were recruited. With a limit of 10 minutes, both groups of participants underwent a series of challenges involving tasks related to manual operation, shape recognition, and color discrimination. All participants underwent the Box and Block Test and the Purdue Pegboard Test to assess manual dexterity, as well as an array of cognitive assessments, including the Trail Making Test and the Mini-Mental Status Examination, which served as a basis to quantify participants' attention, executive functioning, and cognitive abilities. RESULTS: The findings validate the potential application of an interactive electronic pegboard for stroke rehabilitation in clinical contexts. Significant statistical differences (P<.01) were observed across all assessed variables, including age, Box and Block Test results, Purdue Pegboard Test outcomes, Trail Making Test-A scores, and Mini-Mental Status Examination performance, between patients with a history of stroke and their healthy older counterparts. Functional and task testing, along with questionnaire interviews, revealed that patients with a history of stroke demonstrated prolonged completion times and slightly inferior performance. Nonetheless, most patients perceived the prototype as user-friendly and engaging. Thus, in the context of patient rehabilitation interventions or the evaluation of patient cognition, physical functioning, or manual dexterity assessments, the developed pegboard could potentially serve as a valuable tool for hand function, attention, and cognitive rehabilitation, thereby mitigating the burden on health care professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Health care professionals can use digital electronic pegboards not only as a precise one-on-one training tool but also as a flexible system that can be configured for online or offline, single-player or multiplayer use. Through data analysis, a more informed examination of patients' cognitive and functional issues can be conducted. Importantly, patient records will be fully retained throughout practices, exercises, or tests, and by leveraging the characteristics of big data, patients can receive the most accurate rehabilitation prescriptions, thereby assisting them in obtaining optimal care.
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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".