MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411374588 · doi:10.2196/69763

How AI-Based Digital Rehabilitation Improves End-User Adherence: Rapid Review

2025· review· en· W4411374588 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mahsa MohammadNamdar, Michael Lowery Wilson, Kari-Pekka Murtonen, Eeva Aartolahti, Michael Oduor, Katariina Korniloff

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBusiness Finland
KeywordsPreprintComputer scienceRehabilitationMedicineWorld Wide WebPhysical therapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) in rehabilitation technology is transforming traditional methods, focusing on personalization and improved outcomes. The growing area of AI in digital rehabilitation (DR) emphasizes the critical role of end-user compliance with rehabilitation programs. Analyzing how AI-driven DR tools can boost this compliance is vital for creating sustainable practices and tackling future challenges. Objective: This study seeks to assess how AI-based DR can improve the end-user compliance or adherence to rehabilitation. Methods: Following the updated recommendations for the Cochrane rapid review methods guidance and PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, a systematic literature search strategy was led in PubMed, which yielded 922 records, resulting in 6 papers included in this study. Results: The reviewed studies identified 6 key ways in which AI enhances end-user compliance in rehabilitation. The most prevalent method (in 4 studies) involves motivating and engaging users through features like exercise tracking and motivational content. The second method, also noted in 4 studies, focuses on improving communication and information exchange between health care providers and users. Personalized solutions tailored to individual cognitive styles and attitudes were highlighted in 3 studies. Ease of use and system usability, affecting user acceptability, emerged in 2 studies. Additionally, daily notifications, alerts, and reminders were identified as strategies to promote compliance, also noted in 2 studies. While 5 studies looked at AI's role in improving adherence, 1 study specifically assessed AI's capability for objective compliance measurement, contrasting it with traditional subjective self-reports. Conclusions: Our results could be especially relevant and beneficial for rethinking rehabilitation practices and devising effective strategies for the integration of AI in the rehabilitation field, aimed at enhancing end-user adherence to the rehabilitation regimen.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.062
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.062
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.008
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.079
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive TechnologiesSame topicArtificial Intelligence in Healthcare and EducationFrench-language works237,207