The DOI matches its Crossref record; 122 of the 122 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective
Open accessAbstract
Conventional neurorehabilitation appears to have little impact on impairment over and above that of spontaneous biological recovery. Robotic neurorehabilitation has the potential for a greater impact on impairment due to easy deployment, its applicability across of a wide range of motor impairment, its high measurement reliability, and the capacity to deliver high dosage and high intensity training protocols. We first describe current knowledge of the natural history of arm recovery after stroke and of outcome prediction in individual patients. Rehabilitation strategies and outcome measures for impairment versus function are compared. The topics of dosage, intensity, and time of rehabilitation are then discussed. Robots are particularly suitable for both rigorous testing and application of motor learning principles to neurorehabilitation. Computational motor control and learning principles derived from studies in healthy subjects are introduced in the context of robotic neurorehabilitation. Particular attention is paid to the idea of context, task generalization and training schedule. The assumptions that underlie the choice of both movement trajectory programmed into the robot and the degree of active participation required by subjects are examined. We consider rehabilitation as a general learning problem, and examine it from the perspective of theoretical learning frameworks such as supervised and unsupervised learning. We discuss the limitations of current robotic neurorehabilitation paradigms and suggest new research directions from the perspective of computational motor learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(1965) · PubMed · Cited by 14,925
Functional evaluation : Barthel index
Mahonery, F. I. (1965) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 12,762
The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance
Fugl-Meyer, A., Jääskö, L., Leyman, I., Olsson, S., & Steglind, S. (1975) · Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine · doi:10.2340/1650197771331 · Cited by 5,564
The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model
Flash, T., & Hogan, N. (1985) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.05-07-01688.1985 · Cited by 4,395
Writing Group Members, Rosamond, W., Flegal, K., Furie, K., Go, A., Greenlund, K., Haase, N., Hailpern, S. M., Ho, M., Howard, V., et al. (2008) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.107.187998 · Cited by 3,711
Optimal feedback control as a theory of motor coordination
Todorov, E., & Jordan, M. I. (2002) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn963 · Cited by 3,081
The Barthel ADL Index: A reliability study
Collin, C., Wade, D. T., Davies, S., & Horne, V. (1988) · International Disability Studies · doi:10.3109/09638288809164103 · Cited by 2,734
Adaptive representation of dynamics during learning of a motor task
Shadmehr, R., & Mussa-Ivaldi, F. (1994) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.14-05-03208.1994 · Cited by 2,612
Adult Norms for the Box and Block Test of Manual Dexterity
Mathiowetz, V., Volland, G., Kashman, N., & Weber, K. (1985) · The American Journal of Occupational Therapy · doi:10.5014/ajot.39.6.386 · Cited by 2,105
Gladstone, D. J., Danells, C. J., & Black, S. E. (2002) · Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair · doi:10.1177/154596802401105171 · Cited by 2,032
Cited by
Exoskeleton robots for upper-limb rehabilitation: State of the art and future prospects
Lo, H. S., & Xie, S. Q. (2012) · Medical Engineering & Physics · doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2011.10.004 · Cited by 571
A Review on Design of Upper Limb Exoskeletons
Gull, M. A., Bai, S., & Bak, T. (2020) · Robotics · doi:10.3390/robotics9010016 · Cited by 435
Flexible Cognitive Strategies during Motor Learning
Taylor, J. A., & Ivry, R. B. (2011) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1001096 · Cited by 352
Motor learning principles for neurorehabilitation
(2013) · Handbook of Clinical Neurology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-444-52901-5.00008-3 · Cited by 401
Use-dependent and error-based learning of motor behaviors
Diedrichsen, J., White, O., Newman, D., & Lally, N. (2010) · The Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.5406-09.2010 · Cited by 376
Metadata
- Authors
- Huang, V. S., & Krakauer, J. W.
- Venue
- Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
- Published
- 2009-02-25
- Volume
- 6
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 5-5
- ISSN
- 1743-0003 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2018404773
- Cited by
- 425
- References
- 122
- FWCI
- 22.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/1743-0003-6-5
- The paper
- Huang, V. S., & Krakauer, J. W. (2009). Robotic neurorehabilitation: a computational motor learning perspective. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation. https://doi.org/10.1186/1743-0003-6-5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.