ArticleWearable technologies2023
Design and validation of a novel online platform to support the usability evaluation of wearable robotic devices.
Article in Wearable technologies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Soft Robotics in Upper Limb Neurorehabilitation and Assistance: Current Clinical Evidence and Recommendations.Soft robotics · 2025Review
- Methodology for the knowledge-based selection of occupational exoskeletons.Production engineering : research and development · 2025Article
- Towards a validated glossary of usability attributes for the evaluation of wearable robotic devices.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Designing for usability: development and evaluation of a portable minimally-actuated haptic hand and forearm trainer for unsupervised stroke rehabilitation.Frontiers in neurorobotics · 2024Article
- Mixed methods usability evaluation of an assistive wearable robotic hand orthosis for people with spinal cord injury.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- A qualitative study to elicit user requirements for lower limb wearable exoskeletons for gait rehabilitation in spinal cord injury.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- The most used questionnaires for evaluating the usability of robots and smart wearables: A scoping review.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Wearable robotic devices (WRD) are still struggling to fulfill their vast potential. Inadequate daily life usability is one of the main hindrances to increased technology acceptance. Improving usability evaluation practices during the development of WRD could help address these limitations. In this work, we present the design and validation of a novel online platform aiming to fill this gap, the Interactive Usability Toolbox (IUT). This platform consists of a public website that offers an interactive, context-specific search within a database of 154 user research methods and educational information about usability. In a dedicated study, the effect of this platform to support usability evaluation was investigated. Twelve WRD experts were asked to complete the task of defining usability evaluation protocols for two specific use cases. The platform was provided to support one of the use cases. The quality and composition of the proposed protocols were assessed by (i) two blinded reviewers, (ii) the participants themselves, and (iii) the study coordinators. We showed that using the IUT significantly affected the proposed evaluation focus, shifting protocols from mainly effectiveness-oriented to more user-focused studies. The protocol quality, as rated by the external reviewers, remained equivalent to those designed with conventional strategies. A mixed-method usability evaluation of the platform yielded an overall positive image, with detailed suggestions for further improvements. The IUT is expected to positively affect the evaluation and development of WRD through its educational value, the context-specific recommendations supporting ongoing benchmarking endeavors, and highlighting the value of qualitative user research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.