ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2026
Proprioceptive-augmented virtual reality influences the kinematic properties of movement imitation.
Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundVirtual Reality (VR) has been proposed as a tool in rehabilitation to create more realistic, interactive, and engaging environments that can enhance the sense of embodiment, and thus possibly the effect of the treatment itself. Previous research has shown that combining movement observation with somatosensory stimulation may further improve training outcomes. The present study aimed to examine whether a protocol integrating the observation of human movements within an VR environment with proprioceptive stimulation, thereby establishing a Proprioceptive-Augmented virtual Reality (PAR) paradigm, could enhance participants' ability to imitate the dynamic properties of movements presented in VR.
methodsTwenty-three healthy young adults were asked to imitate the features of a flexion-extension forearm movement observed in an immersive VR environment, either while receiving or not receiving 80 Hz muscle tendon vibration that induced an illusory sensation of movement congruent with the observed direction (PAR). The imitation task was performed with the stimulated forearm either after the stimulation had ended (OFFLINE imitation) or concurrently with it (ONLINE imitation). Participants' ability to reproduce the avatar's mean and maximal velocities was assessed (reproduction error). Root means square error (RMSE) between avatar and participants' trajectory was calculated. In addition, a questionnaire evaluating the sense of embodiment was administered after the OFFLINE imitation task under both conditions, as well as the evaluation of the vividness evoked by PAR and VR.
resultsIn the OFFLINE task the reproduction error was lower in PAR than in VR, while the opposite was obtained in the ONLINE task. In the OFFLINE task no difference emerged between PAR and VR RMSE values, whilst in the ONLINE task PAR RMSE was higher than that in VR. PAR evoked a higher sense of embodiment and higher vividness compared to VR when considering all the domain tested (body ownership, sense of agency, location of the body).
conclusionsThese findings indicate that proprioceptive stimulation in the PAR condition positively affected movement reproduction during the OFFLINE imitation task, likely benefiting from the heightened sense of embodiment and vividness elicited in this condition. This suggests that muscle tendon vibration can enhance the perception of self-motion in VR, enabling richer interaction strategies and offering promising prospects for sensorimotor rehabilitation.
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.