CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 23Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsMotor Control and Adaptation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Kinematics of aimed movements in ecological immersive virtual reality: a comparative study with real world

Open access
Arlati, Sara, Keijsers, Noël, Paolini, Gabriele, Ferrigno, Giancarlo, Sacco, Marco·2022·Virtual Reality
DOI 10.1007/s10055-021-00603-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10055-021-00603-5

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 65

  1. Arlati S, Spoladore D, Baldassini D, Sacco M, Greci L (2018) VirtualCruiseTour: an AR/VR application to promote shore excursions on cruise ships. In: De Paolis LT, Bourdot P (eds) Augmented reality, virtual reality, and computer graphics. Springer, Cham, pp 133–147 · DOI
  2. Arlati S, Di Santo SG, Franchini F, Mondellini M, Filiputti B, Luchi M, Greci L (2021) Acceptance and usability of immersive virtual reality in older adults with objective and subjective cognitive decline. J Alzheimer’s Dis 80(3):1025–1038. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-201431 · DOI
  3. Assi A, Bakouny Z, Karam M, Massaad A, Skalli W, Ghanem I (2016) Three-dimensional kinematics of upper limb anatomical movements in asymptomatic adults: dominant vs. non-dominant. Hum Mov Sci 50:10–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2016.09.002 · DOI
  4. Bagesteiro LB, Sainburg RL (2002) Handedness: dominant arm advantages in control of limb dynamics. J Neurophysiol 88(5):2408–2421. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.00901.2001 · DOI
  5. Bradshaw JL, Bradshaw JA, Nettleton NC (1990) Abduction, adduction and hand differences in simple and serial movements. Neuropsychologia 28(9):917–931. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(90)90108-Z · DOI
  6. Câmara J, Ferreira R, Teixeira L, Nóbrega J, Romeira C, Badia SBI, Faria AL (2021) Efficacy of adaptive cognitive training through desktop virtual reality and paper-and-pencil in the treatment of mental and behavioral disorders. Virtual Reality. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-021-00559-6 · DOI
  7. Cirstea MC, Mitnitski AB, Feldman AG, Levin MF (2003) Interjoint coordination dynamics during reaching in stroke. Exp Brain Res 151(3):289–300. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1438-0 · DOI
  8. Connolly JD, Goodale MA (1999) The role of visual feedback of hand position in the control of manual prehension. Exp Brain Res 125(3):281–286. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002210050684 · DOI
  9. Costela FM, Woods RL (2020) The impact of field of view on understanding of a movie is reduced by magnifying around the center of interest. Translational Vision Sci Technol 9(8):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1167/tvst.9.8.6 · DOI
  10. Cummings JJ, Bailenson JN (2016) How immersive is enough? a meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychol 19(2):272–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Diffendaffer AZ, Fleisig GS, Ivey B, Aune KT (2019) Kinematic and kinetic differences between left-and right-handed professional baseball pitchers. Sports Biomech 18(4):448–455. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2018.1429489 · DOI
  12. Fahle M, Henke-Fahle S (1996) Interobserver variance in perceptual performance and learning. Invest Ophthalmol vis Sci 37(5):869–877
  13. Faria AL, Andrade A, Soares L, Badia ISB (2016) Benefits of virtual reality based cognitive rehabilitation through simulated activities of daily living: a randomized controlled trial with stroke patients. J NeuroEng Rehabil 13(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-016-0204-z · DOI · Paper page
  14. Furmanek MP, Schettino LF, Yarossi M, Kirkman S, Adamovich SV, Tunik E (2019) Coordination of reach-to-grasp in physical and haptic-free virtual environments. J Neuroeng Rehabil 16(1):78. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-019-0525-9 · DOI
  15. Gerig N, Mayo J, Baur K, Wittmann F, Riener R, Wolf P (2018) Missing depth cues in virtual reality limit performance and quality of three dimensional reaching movements. PLoS ONE 13(1):e0189275. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189275 · DOI
  16. Gershon P, Klatzky RL, Lee R (2015) Handedness in a virtual haptic environment: assessments from kinematic behavior and modeling. Acta Physiol (oxf) 155:37–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.11.014 · DOI
  17. González-Alvarez C, Subramanian A, Pardhan S (2007) Reaching and grasping with restricted peripheral vision. Ophthalmic Physiol Opt 27(3):265–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-1313.2007.00476.x · DOI
  18. Grassini S, Laumann K, Rasmussen Skogstad M (2020) The use of virtual reality alone does not promote training performance (but sense of presence does). Front Psychol. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01743 · DOI
  19. Haaland KY, Prestopnik JL, Knight RT, Lee RR (2004) Hemispheric asymmetries for kinematic and positional aspects of reaching. Brain 127(5):1145–1158. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/awh133 · DOI
  20. Holmes D, Charles D, Morrow P, McClean S, McDonough S (2016) Usability and performance of leap motion and oculus rift for upper arm virtual reality stroke rehabilitation. J Altern Med Res 9(4):1–10
  21. IJsselsteijn WA, Riva G (2003). Being there: the experience of presence in mediated environments. In Being there: concepts, effects and measurements of user presence in synthetic environments (pp. 3-16). IOS Press
  22. Jamiy FEl, & Marsh R (2019) Distance estimation in virtual reality and augmented reality: a survey. IEEE International Conference on Electro Information Technology, 2019-May, 063–068 https://doi.org/10.1109/EIT.2019.8834182 · DOI
  23. Jang SH (2013) Motor function-related maladaptive plasticity in stroke: a review. NeuroRehabilitation 32(2):311–316 · DOI
  24. Jones TA (2017) Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke. Nat Rev Neurosci 18(5):267–280. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.26 · DOI
  25. Knaut LA, Subramanian SK, McFadyen BJ, Bourbonnais D, Levin MF (2009) Kinematics of pointing movements made in a virtual versus a physical 3-Dimensional environment in healthy and stroke subjects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 90(5):793–802. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.10.030 · DOI
  26. Koenig ST, Krch D, Lange BS, Rizzo A (2019) Virtual reality and rehabilitation In Handbook of rehabilitation psychology, 3rd ed (pp 521–539) American Psychological Association · DOI
  27. Lee S, Kim Y, Lee BH (2016) Effect of virtual reality-based bilateral upper extremity training on upper extremity function after stroke: a randomized controlled clinical trial. Occup Ther Int 23(4):357–368. https://doi.org/10.1002/oti.1437 · DOI
  28. Levin MF (2020) What is the potential of virtual reality for post-stroke sensorimotor rehabilitation? Expert Rev Neurother 20(3):195–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14737175.2020.1727741 · DOI
  29. Levin MF, Kleim JA, Wolf SL (2009) What do motor “recovery” and “compensationg” mean in patients following stroke? Neurorehabil Neural Repair 23(4):313–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/1545968308328727 · DOI
  30. Levin MF, Magdalon EC, Michaelsen SM, Quevedo AAF (2015) Quality of grasping and the role of haptics in a 3-D immersive virtual reality environment in individuals with stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 23(6):1047–1055. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2014.2387412 · DOI
  31. Liebermann DG, Berman S, Weiss PL, Levin MF (2012) Kinematics of reaching movements in a 2-D virtual environment in adults with and without stroke. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 20(6):778–787. https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2012.2206117 · DOI
  32. Lindsay MP, Norrving B, Sacco RL, Brainin M, Hacke W, Martins S, Feigin V (2019) World stroke organization (WSO): global stroke fact sheet 2019. Int J Stroke 14(8):806–817. https://doi.org/10.1177/1747493019881353 · DOI
  33. Liu L, Lierey RV, Nieuwenhuizen C, Martens JB (2009) Comparing aimed movements in the real world and in virtual reality. Proc IEEE Virtual Reality. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2009.4811026 · DOI
  34. Loftus A, Murphy S, McKenna I, Mon-Williams M (2004) Reduced fields of view are neither necessary nor sufficient for distance underestimation but reduce precision and may cause calibration problems. Exp Brain Res 158(3):328–335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-004-1900-7 · DOI
  35. Lum PS, Mulroy S, Amdur RL, Requejo P, Prilutsky BI, Dromerick AW (2009b) Gains in upper extremity function after stroke via recovery or compensation: potential differential effects on amount of real-world limb use. Top Stroke Rehabil 16(4):237–253 · DOI
  36. Lum PS, Mulroy S, Amdur RL, Requejo P, Prilutsky BI, Dromerick AW (2009a) Gains in upper extremity function after stroke via recovery or compensation: Potential differential effects on amount of real-world limb use Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation, 16(4), 237–253 Retrieved from http://www.embase.com/search/results?subaction=viewrecord&from=export&id=L355283571%0Ahttp://dx.doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1310/tsr1604-237 · DOI
  37. Magdalon EC, Michaelsen SM, Quevedo AA, Levin MF (2011) Comparison of grasping movements made by healthy subjects in a 3-dimensional immersive virtual versus physical environment. Acta Physiol (oxf) 138(1):126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.05.015 · DOI
  38. Matsuki K, Matsuki KO, Mu S, Yamaguchi S, Ochiai N, Sasho T, Banks SA (2011) In vivo 3-dimensional analysis of scapular kinematics: comparison of dominant and non-dominant shoulders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(4):659–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.09.012 · DOI
  39. Mayo NE, Wood-Dauphinee S, Côté R, Durcan L, Carlton J (2002) Activity, participation, and quality of life 6 months poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83(8):1035–1042. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.33984 · DOI
  40. Mekbib DB, Han J, Zhang L, Fang S, Jiang H, Zhu J, Xu D (2020) Virtual reality therapy for upper limb rehabilitation in patients with stroke: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Brain Inj 34(4):456–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699052.2020.1725126 · DOI
  41. Mieschke PE, Elliott D, Helsen WF, Carson RG, Coull JA (2001) Manual asymmetries in the preparation and control of goal-directed movements. Brain Cogn 45(1):129–140. https://doi.org/10.1006/brcg.2000.1262 · DOI
  42. Minderer M, Harvey CD, Donato F, Moser EI (2016) Neuroscience: virtual reality explored. Nature 533(7603):324–325. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17899 · DOI
  43. Mondellini M, Arlati S, Pizzagalli S, Greci L, Sacco M, Ferrigno G, Sacco M (2018) Assessment of the usability of an immersive virtual supermarket for the cognitive rehabilitation of elderly patients: a pilot study on young adults 2018 IEEE 6th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1109/SeGAH.2018.8401313 · DOI
  44. Mottura S, Fontana L, Arlati S, Zangiacomi A, Redaelli C, Sacco M (2015) A virtual reality system for strengthening awareness and participation in rehabilitation for post-stroke patients. J Multimodal User Interfaces. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12193-015-0184-5 · DOI
  45. Norrving B, Kissela B (2013) The global burden of stroke and need for a continuum of care Neurology, 80(3 SUPPL.2), S5–S12. Retrieved from http://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&PAGE=reference&D=emed11&NEWS=N&AN=2013103123 · DOI
  46. Olbrich M, Graf H, Keil J, Gad R, Bamfaste S Nicolini F (2018) Virtual reality based space operations – a study of ESA’s potential for VR based training and simulation Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 10909 LNCS, 438–451 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91581-4_33 · DOI
  47. Parsons TD (2015) Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity and experimental control in the clinical, affective and social neurosciences. Front Human Neurosci 9:660. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2015.00660 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Pieri L, Serino S, Cipresso P, Mancuso V, Riva G, Pedroli E (2021) The ObReco-360°: a new ecological tool to memory assessment using 360° immersive technology. Virtual Reality. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-021-00526-1 · DOI
  49. Przybyla A, Good DC, Sainburg RL (2012) Dynamic dominance varies with handedness: reduced interlimb asymmetries in left-handers. Exp Brain Res 216(3):419–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2946-y · DOI
  50. Rizzo A, Kim GJJ (2005) A SWOT analysis of the field of virtual reality rehabilitation and therapy. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 14(2):119–146. https://doi.org/10.1162/1054746053967094 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Sachlikidis A, Salter C (2007) A biomechanical comparison of dominant and non-dominant arm throws for speed and accuracy. Sports Biomech 6(3):334–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763140701491294 · DOI
  52. Sampson M, Shau YW, James King M (2012) Bilateral upper limb trainer with virtual reality for post-stroke rehabilitation: case series report. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 7(1):55–62. https://doi.org/10.3109/17483107.2011.562959 · DOI
  53. Schettino LF, Adamovich SV, Poizner H (2003) Effects of object shape and visual feedback on hand configuration during grasping. Exp Brain Res 151(2):158–166. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-003-1435-3 · DOI
  54. Slater M, Steed A (2000) A virtual presence counter. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 9(5):413–434. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474600566925 · DOI
  55. Stanney K, Lawson BD, Rokers B, Dennison M, Fidopiastis C, Stoffregen T, Fulvio JM (2020) Identifying causes of and solutions for cybersickness in immersive technology: reformulation of a research and development agenda. Int J Human-Computer Interact 36(19):1783–1803. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1828535 · DOI
  56. Stewart JC, Gordon J, Winstein CJ (2013) Planning and adjustments for the control of reach extent in a virtual environment. J Neuroeng Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-10-27 · DOI
  57. Subramanian S, Beaudoin C, Levin MF (2008) Arm pointing movements in a three dimensional virtual environment: effect of two different viewing media 2008 Virtual Rehabilitation, IWVR, 181–185 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICVR.2008.4625157 · DOI
  58. Viau A, Feldman AG, McFadyen BJ, Levin MF (2004) Reaching in reality and virtual reality: a comparison of movement kinematics in healthy subjects and in adults with hemiparesis. J Neuroeng Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-1-11 · DOI
  59. Villa R, Tidoni E, Porciello G, Aglioti SM (2018) Violation of expectations about movement and goal achievement leads to sense of agency reduction. Exp Brain Res 236(7):2123–2135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-018-5286-3 · DOI
  60. Weech S, Kenny S, Barnett-Cowan M (2019) Presence and cybersickness in virtual reality are negatively related: a review. Front Psychol 10:158 · DOI · Paper page
  61. Xiao X, Hu H, Li L, Li L (2019) Comparison of dominant hand to non-dominant hand in conduction of reaching task from 3D kinematic data: trade-off between successful rate and movement efficiency. Math Biosci Eng 16(3):1611–1624. https://doi.org/10.3934/mbe.2019077 · DOI
  62. Yates M, Kelemen A, Sik Lanyi C (2016) Virtual reality gaming in the rehabilitation of the upper extremities post-stroke. Brain Inj 30(7):855–863. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2016.1144146 · DOI
  63. Yoshizaki K, Hamada J, Tamai K, Sahara R, Fujiwara T, Fujimoto T (2009) Analysis of the scapulohumeral rhythm and electromyography of the shoulder muscles during elevation and lowering: comparison of dominant and non-dominant shoulders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(5):756–763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.02.021 · DOI
  64. Zahabi M, Abdul Razak AM (2020) Adaptive virtual reality-based training: a systematic literature review and framework. Virtual Reality 24(4):725–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00434-w · DOI · Paper page
  65. Zimmerli L, Krewer C, Gassert R, Müller F, Riener R, Lünenburger L (2012) Validation of a mechanism to balance exercise difficulty in robot-assisted upper-extremity rehabilitation after stroke. J NeuroEng Rehabil. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-9-6 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Arlati, S., Keijsers, N., Paolini, G., Ferrigno, G., & Sacco, M.
Affiliations
  • National Research Council (IT)
  • Sint Maartenskliniek (NL)
  • Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Corresponding author
Arlati, Sara
ORCID
Venue
Virtual Reality
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-11-10
Volume
26
Issue
3
Pages
885-901
ISSN
  • 1359-4338 (ISSN-L)
  • 1434-9957
DOI
10.1007/s10055-021-00603-5
OpenAlex
W3214059985
Cited by
23
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4
FWCI
1.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Virtual Reality (publishedVersion)
  • Virtual Community of Pathological Anatomy (University of Castilla La Mancha) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
upper limb rehabilitation, stroke rehabilitation, reach-to-grasp, movement kinematics, handedness, joint angles, natural gestures

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review