MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409761455 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3563824

Embedded System for Interactive Pneumatic Hand Rehabilitation: Real-Time Gaming Interface With Cognitive Stimulation for Motor Recovery

2025· article· en· W4409761455 on OpenAlexafffund
Narges Ghobadi, Witold Kinsner, Tony Szturm, Nariman Sepehri

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceHuman–computer interactionInterface (matter)CognitionRehabilitationStimulationBrain–computer interfacePhysical medicine and rehabilitationEmbedded systemPsychologyOperating systemMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Restoring fine motor skills in individuals with upper extremity sensory-motor post-stroke impairments necessitates repetitive, task-specific exercises to promote functional recovery. Given the substantial time commitment required for therapy, rehabilitation tools must be not only effective, but also engaging by adopting a game-based approach to mitigate the monotony of prolonged repetitive exercises. This paper presents a user-friendly finger-thumb mechanism designed to support the index and middle fingers as well as the thumb, specifically for patients with hand injuries. The device establishes a wireless connection to a gaming platform enabling patients to engage with computer games in real-time through purposeful thumb and finger movements. This connectivity is established through two Raspberry Pi boards utilizing a server-client network. Additionally, the device incorporates assistive or resistive forces during gameplay to adjust the level of assistance or challenge based on the individual’s motor control proficiency. With a minimal data transfer delay of 10 ms, and a 50 ms delay for game event updates, patients can seamlessly participate in the gaming experience and modify events in real-time through the newly developed wearable device. In the experiments, assistive mode achieved a 100Movement errors varied across modes, with assistive mode showing the lowest errors, indicating more accurate and consistent performance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0140.002

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.332 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207