Currently submitted to: JMIR Rehabilitation and Assistive Technologies
Date Submitted: Nov 7, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Dec 5, 2025 - Jan 30, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
From Metrics to Meaning: Exploring Clinicians’ Perspectives on Digital Metrics of Functioning of the Upper Limb in Neurological Rehabilitation
ABSTRACT
Background:
Digital assessment technologies, such as optical motion capture and inertial measurement units, enable detailed kinematic analysis and continuous monitoring of upper-limb activity in persons with neurologic diseases. While such digital metrics of functioning are increasingly recognized in research, their uptake in clinical neurorehabilitation is limited. It remains unclear which digital metrics of functioning clinicians perceive as most meaningful and how these are integrated into patient-centered care. Understanding clinicians’ information needs and reasoning processes is a prerequisite for targeted education and competency development to support the implementation of digital assessments.
Objective:
To characterize how rehabilitation professionals perceive, prioritize, and integrate digital metrics of functioning into clinical reasoning and to identify features that would support their routine use.
Methods:
Three 90-minute focus groups were conducted in 3 Swiss neurorehabilitation centers, involving 11 clinicians with diverse professional backgrounds (5 physiotherapists, 4 occupational therapists, 1 movement scientist, and 1 medical practitioner). Participants discussed essential parameter domains and individually indicated the relevance and meaningfulness of 17 kinematic metrics related to the well-studied drinking task and 10 established arm use performance metrics. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, and rating data were summarized descriptively.
Results:
Five main themes were identified. (1) Functional requirements to interpret movement quality and performance (active/passive range of motion (ROM), strength, selective muscle control, grasp) form the basis for interpreting movement. (2) Essential aspects of movement quality (smoothness, efficiency, compensatory movement) are valued when aligned with observable task execution. (3) Added value of real-world performance (hourly activity profiles, arm-use symmetry, functional workspace) represents the reference for patient-centered reasoning. (4) Individualizing what matters, including diagnosis-specific preferences, shapes assessment selection. (5) Blending clinical eye and reference data reflects clinicians’ reliance on visual judgment complemented by normative values. Intuitive metrics such as task duration, number of movement units, and ROM were favored, whereas confidence was lower in more complex metrics (e.g., jerk, inter-joint coordination).
Conclusions:
Clinicians value intuitive digital metrics of functioning when they are clearly linked to patient-centered outcomes and supported by normative references. The findings highlight the need for targeted educational strategies and digital competency training that help clinicians interpret digital metrics and integrate them with contextual information and clinical reasoning.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.