Cited by 154Orthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryContext-Aware Activity Recognition Systems

A low cost instrumented glove for extended monitoring and functional hand assessment

Simone, Lisa K., Sundarrajan, Nappinnai, Luo, Xun, Jia, Yicheng, Kamper, Derek G.·2007·Journal of Neuroscience Methods

Abstract

A wearable finger flexion monitor developed to measure hand function in individuals with hand dysfunction was evaluated for feasibility, measurement repeatability and reliability, fidelity of wireless transmission, and user acceptance. Configuration of the monitor allows use in situations when a traditional measurement glove cannot be worn. Five healthy individuals participated in the study of repeatability, while 10 healthy individuals and 10 individuals with acquired brain injury participated in trials to assess feasibility and user comfort. Repeatability results showed an overall error of 3.4 degrees , compared to 5.5 degrees and 5.7 degrees reported with other sensor gloves, and to manual measurements (5-8 degrees). Intraclass coefficient of reliability (using coefficient alpha) averaged 0.95. User feedback regarding comfort of the monitor was very high. Loss of data during wireless transmission was no greater than 1.2%. Results demonstrate that the monitor has a strong potential to be used as a tool for objective hand function evaluation in the home and community for both short- and long-term monitoring.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2006.09.021

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Simone, L. K., Sundarrajan, N., Luo, X., Jia, Y., & Kamper, D. G.
Affiliations
  • New Jersey Institute of Technology (US)
  • Kessler Institute for Rehabilitation (US)
  • Shirley Ryan AbilityLab (US)
Corresponding author
Simone, Lisa K.
Venue
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-03
Volume
160
Issue
2
Pages
335-348
ISSN
0165-0270 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2155982455
Cited by
154
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
2.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience Methods (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Kessler Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24HD050821)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Context-Aware Activity Recognition Systems
Keywords
hand function assessment, acquired brain injury, home monitoring, repeatability, reliability statistics, wireless data transmission, user comfort, low-cost instrumentation
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Disability Evaluation, Electrodes, Electrodiagnosis, Electrophysiology, Equipment and Supplies, Feasibility Studies, Feedback, Female, Fingers, Hand, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Monitoring, Physiologic, Movement, Movement Disorders, Predictive Value of Tests, Telemetry, Gloves, Protective

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