ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024
Exploring stroke survivors' and physiotherapists' perspectives of the potential for markerless motion capture technology in community rehabilitation.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical variables provide the main predictive signal for early in-hospital rehabilitation triage after small-artery occlusion stroke: development and internal validation of an interpretable model.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Exploring Rehabilitation Patients' Perspectives on What Matters for the Adoption of Home-Based Rehabilitation Technology: Q-Methodology Study.JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionMany stroke survivors do not receive optimal levels of personalised therapy to support their recovery. Use of technology for stroke rehabilitation has increased in recent years to help minimise gaps in service provision. Markerless motion capture technology is currently being used for musculoskeletal and occupational health screening and could offer a means to provide personalised guidance to stroke survivors struggling to access rehabilitation.
aimsThis study considered context, stakeholders, and key uncertainties surrounding the use of markerless motion capture technology in community stroke rehabilitation from the perspectives of stroke survivors and physiotherapists with a view to adapting an existing intervention in a new context.
methodsThree focus groups were conducted with eight stroke survivors and five therapists. Data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis.
resultsFive themes were identified: limited access to community care; personal motivation; pandemic changed rehabilitation practice; perceptions of technology; and role of markerless technology for providing feedback.
conclusionsParticipants identified problems associated with the access of community stroke rehabilitation, exacerbated by Covid-19 restrictions. Participants were positive about the potential for the use of markerless motion capture technology to support personalised, effective stroke rehabilitation in the future, providing it is developed to meet stroke survivor specific needs.
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.