↓ Skip to main content

Reliability, validity and discriminant ability of the instrumental indices provided by a novel planar robotic device for upper limb rehabilitation

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
121 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
Reliability, validity and discriminant ability of the instrumental indices provided by a novel planar robotic device for upper limb rehabilitation
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, May 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12984-018-0385-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marco Germanotta, Arianna Cruciani, Cristiano Pecchioli, Simona Loreti, Albino Spedicato, Matteo Meotti, Rita Mosca, Gabriele Speranza, Francesca Cecchi, Giorgia Giannarelli, Luca Padua, Irene Aprile

Abstract

In the last few years, there has been an increasing interest in the use of robotic devices to objectively quantify motor performance of patients after brain damage. Although these robot-derived measures can potentially add meaningful information about the patient's dexterity, as well as be used as outcome measurements after the rehabilitation treatment, they need to be validated before being used in clinical practice. The present work aims to evaluate the reliability, the validity and the discriminant ability of the metrics provided by a novel robotic device for upper limb rehabilitation. Forty-eight patients with sub-acute stroke and 40 age-matched healthy subjects were involved in this study. Clinical evaluation included: Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the upper limb, Action Research Arm Test, and Barthel Index. Robotic evaluation of the upper limb performance consisted of 14 measures of motor ability quantifying the dexterity in performing planar reaching movements. Patients were evaluated twice, one day apart, to assess the reliability of the robotic metrics, using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. Validity was assessed by analyzing the correlation of the robotic metrics with the clinical scales, by means of the Spearman's Correlation Coefficient. Finally, the ability of the robotic metrics to distinguish between patients with stroke and healthy subjects was investigated with t-tests and the Effect Size. Reliability was found to be excellent for 12 measures and from moderate to good for the remaining 2. Most of the robotic indices were strongly correlated with the clinical scales, while a few showed a moderate correlation and only one was not correlated with the Barthel Index and weakly correlated with the remain two. Finally, all but one the provided metrics were able to discriminate between the two groups, with large effect sizes for most of them. We found that all the robotic indices except one provided by a novel robotic device for upper limb rehabilitation are reliable, sensitive and strongly correlated both with motor and disability clinical scales. Therefore, this device is suitable as evaluation tool for the upper limb motor performance of patients with sub-acute stroke in clinical practice. NCT02879279 .

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 121 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 121 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 14%
Student > Master 16 13%
Student > Bachelor 15 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 7%
Other 8 7%
Other 16 13%
Unknown 40 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 19 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 15 12%
Engineering 13 11%
Neuroscience 11 9%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 18 15%
Unknown 42 35%
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 16 May 2018.
All research outputs
#20,492,220
of 23,055,429 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#1,150
of 1,292 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#288,018
of 327,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#23
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,055,429 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 327,737 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.