↓ Skip to main content

SoftHand at the CYBATHLON: a user’s experience

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
SoftHand at the CYBATHLON: a user’s experience
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12984-017-0334-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sasha Blue Godfrey, Matteo Rossi, Cristina Piazza, Manuel Giuseppe Catalano, Matteo Bianchi, Giorgio Grioli, Kristin D. Zhao, Antonio Bicchi

Abstract

Roughly one-quarter of upper limb prosthesis users reject their prosthesis. Reasons for rejection range from comfort, to cost, aesthetics, function, and more. This paper follows a single user from training with and testing of a novel upper-limb myoelectric prosthesis (the SoftHand Pro) for participation in the CYBATHLON rehearsal to training for and competing in the CYBATHLON 2016 with a figure-of-nine harness controlled powered prosthesis (SoftHand Pro-H) to explore the feasibility and usability of a flexible anthropomorphic prosthetic hand. The CYBATHLON pilot took part in multiple in-lab training sessions with the SoftHand Pro and SoftHand Pro-H; these sessions focused on basic control and use of the prosthetic devices and direct training of the tasks in the CYBATHLON. He used these devices in competition in the Powered Arm Prosthesis Race in the CYBATHLON rehearsal and 2016 events. In training for the CYBATHLON rehearsal, the subject was able to quickly improve performance with the myoelectric SHP despite typically using a body-powered prosthetic hook. The subject improved further with additional training using the figure-of-nine harness-controlled SHPH in preparation for the CYBATHLON. The Pilot placed 3rd (out of 4) in the rehearsal. In the CYBATHLON, he placed 5th (out of 12) and was one of only two pilots who successfully completed all tasks in the competition, having the second-highest score overall. Results with the SoftHand Pro and Pro-H suggest it to be a viable alternative to existing anthropomorphic hands and show that the unique flexibility of the hand is easily learned and exploited.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 18%
Student > Master 5 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 12%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 11 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 12 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Sports and Recreations 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 13 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 December 2017.
All research outputs
#17,923,510
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#948
of 1,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#306,058
of 438,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#24
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,292 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 438,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.