Trial · NCT07636538
Auto-calibrating System for Upper Limb Disability Assessment, Neurological and Occupational Rehabilitation
NCT07636538, Not applicable, Not yet recruiting, University of Pavia
3 sourcestrials-2026-11-12-0.5.0
Cite this record
ConductScience Library. Auto-calibrating System for Upper Limb Disability Assessment, Neurological and Occupational Rehabilitation. Trials, record NCT07636538. Release trials-2026-11-12-0.5.0, 12 Nov 2026. https://conductscience.org/library/trials/NCT07636538
On this page
Trial
As registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, in the graph's capture of the registry.
- Title
- Auto-calibrating System for Upper Limb Disability Assessment, Neurological and Occupational Rehabilitation
- NCT number
- NCT07636538
- Status
- Not yet recruiting
- Phases
- Not applicable
- Enrollment
- 30 participants, estimated
- Lead sponsor
- University of Pavia
- Conditions
- Stroke, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, PARKINSON DISEASE (Disorder), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI)
- Interventions
- Auto-calibrating System for Upper Limb disability Assessment, neurological and occupational Rehabilitation, conventional therapy
- First posted
- 2026-06-09
- Last updated
- 2026-06-09
Source ClinicalTrials.gov
Registered outcomes18
Each outcome the trial registered, primary first, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
| List | Outcome | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | System Usability Scale (SUS) score | at the end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Usability of the investigational device will be assessed using the System Usability Scale (SUS). Minimum Value: 0. Maximum Value: 100. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate greater perceived usability and therefore a better outcome. |
| Primary | Quebec User Evaluation of Satisfaction with Assistive Technology (QUEST 2.0) Score | At the end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Participant satisfaction and usability assessment using the QUEST 2.0 questionnaire. Minimum Value: 1 Maximum Value: 5 Interpretation: Higher scores indicate greater user satisfaction with the assistive technology and therefore a better outcome. |
| Primary | Incidence of Adverse Events | Throughout the study period (up to 12 sessions) | Safety assessment based on the frequency of adverse events reported by participants or observed by operators during device use. |
| Primary | State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) score | Baseline and end of treatment | Anxiety associated with device use assessed through self-reported scale, State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Scale Title: State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). Minimum Value: 20. Maximum Value: 80. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate greater anxiety and therefore a worse outcome. |
| Primary | Technology Assisted Rehabilitation Patient Perception Questionnaire (TARPP-Q) Usability Questionnaire Score | At the end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Usability assessment evaluating the ability of users to safely, effectively, and efficiently interact with the system. Scale Title: Technology Assisted Rehabilitation Patient Perception Questionnaire (TARPP-Q) - Usability Domain. Minimum Value: 5. Maximum Value: 20. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate better perceived usability of the technology-assisted rehabilitation device and therefore a better outcome. |
| Primary | Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) score | At the end of the treatment (after 12 sessions). | Perceived stress due to the use of the device assessed via Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) score. Scale Title: Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Minimum Value: 0. Maximum Value: 40. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate greater perceived stress and therefore a worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) Score | Baseline and end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Assessment of upper limb disability and motor function using the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) questionnaire. Scale Title: Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH) Questionnaire Minimum Value: 0. Maximum Value: 100. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate greater disability and symptoms of the upper extremity and therefore a worse outcome. |
| Secondary | Fugl-Meyer Assessment Score | Baseline and end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Evaluation of upper limb motor performance using the Fugl-Meyer Assessment. Minimum Value: 0. Maximum Value: 226. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate better sensorimotor function and therefore a better outcome. |
| Secondary | ABILHAND Scale Score | Baseline and end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Assessment of manual ability in activities of daily living using the ABILHAND scale. Minimum Value: 0 . Maximum Value: Not strictly bounded. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate better perceived manual ability in performing daily activities and therefore a better outcome. |
| Secondary | Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) Score | Baseline and end of treatment (after 12 sessions) | Evaluation of upper limb motor function using the Action Research Arm Test. Scale Title: Action Research Arm Test (ARAT) Minimum Value: 0. Maximum Value: 57. Interpretation: Higher scores indicate better upper limb function and dexterity and therefore a better outcome. |
1 to 10 of 18Source ClinicalTrials.gov
See all 18 registered outcomesOutcomes0
Each outcome the trial posted results for, in ClinicalTrials.gov's words.
None in this release.
Results by group0
Each measurement the trial posted, group by group, in the words and numbers it posted.
None in this release.
Participant flow0
How many started, completed or left each group, period by period.
None in this release.
Adverse events0
Each adverse event the trial posted, group by group: the participants affected out of those at risk.
None in this release.
Adverse event totals0
The totals the trial posted for each group.
None in this release.
Papers0
The papers the trial lists on ClinicalTrials.gov.
None in this release.
Grants0
The grants NIH RePORTER links to the trial, newest funded first: NIH's, and some of AHRQ's, CDC's, FDA's and VA's. Each shows its title, principal investigators, organization and funder in its newest year.
None in this release.
Trial comparisons0
Comparisons of the trial's two groups, calculated by ConductScience from the counts it posted.
None in this release.
Tests4
The ConductCognition tests this trial's registered outcomes name, as ScienceGraph matched them in trial-tests-2026-11-12-0.2.1.
| Test | Named as | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Digit Span Test | Secondary outcome | ConductCognition |
| Stroop Color-Word Test | Secondary outcome | ConductCognition |
| Trail Making Test A | Secondary outcome | ConductCognition |
| Trail Making Test B | Secondary outcome | ConductCognition |
Data dates
The day each source was copied for this release.
Sources 3
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTFreely available. Acknowledgement requested
- ClinicalTrials.govNo license stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain
Each source's terms
- ClinicalTrials.gov's posted results, through CTTI's AACTClinicalTrials.gov data via Aggregate Analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov (AACT), CTTI. CTTI makes its materials freely available and requests acknowledgement. https://aact.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/documentation/299
- ClinicalTrials.govnone stated
- NIH RePORTER's clinical studies and project filesPublic domain (NIH RePORTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov's data carry an international copyright outside the United States: https://clinicaltrials.gov/about-site/terms-conditions.
For software
Read this trial from software.
The record and each of its lists are JSON, twenty rows a page. No key.
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT07636538
GET https://conductscience.org/api/trials/v1/NCT07636538/registered