Psychometric properties of technology-assisted matching paradigms in post-stroke upper limb proprioceptive assessment: a scoping review
- PMID: 40642214
- PMCID: PMC12243609
- DOI: 10.3389/fneur.2025.1556111
Psychometric properties of technology-assisted matching paradigms in post-stroke upper limb proprioceptive assessment: a scoping review
Abstract
Introduction: Proprioceptive impairments affect 34-64% of post-stroke patients, impacting motor recovery and daily activities. Technology-assisted matching paradigms offer precise, quantitative assessment of upper limb proprioception, but their psychometric properties require evaluation.
Methods: The search was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and MEDLINE to identify studies on technology-assisted matching paradigms for assessing upper limb proprioception in post-stroke patients. Studies were selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and relevant data were extracted.
Results: A total of 13 articles were included. Upper limb robots for active mirror-matching tasks were the most used technology among our included studies (9 out of 13 studies). Seven studies showed a moderate level of concurrent validity, and four studies showed a moderate level of convergent validity. Seven studies compared stroke patients to healthy individuals, with most showing good responsiveness. Five studies revealed moderate to high test-retest and inter-rater reliability.
Conclusion: Technology-assisted matching paradigms demonstrate moderate validity and moderate to high reliability when applied in clinical settings for assessing upper limb proprioception in post-stroke patients.
Keywords: assessment; proprioception; psychometrics; rehabilitation engineering; sensory disorders; stroke.
Copyright © 2025 Gu, Lin, Zeng, Miller and Zhang.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Figures



References
Publication types
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources