Next Article in Journal
A Real-Time Automated Defect Detection System for Ceramic Pieces Manufacturing Process Based on Computer Vision with Deep Learning
Previous Article in Journal
Transformer-Based Multiple-Object Tracking via Anchor-Based-Query and Template Matching
Previous Article in Special Issue
Give Me a Sign: Using Data Gloves for Static Hand-Shape Recognition
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Characterization of Upper Extremity Kinematics Using Virtual Reality Movement Tasks and Wearable IMU Technology

Sensors 2024, 24(1), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24010233
by Skyler A. Barclay *, Lanna N. Klausing, Tessa M. Hill, Allison L. Kinney, Timothy Reissman and Megan E. Reissman
Reviewer 1:
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Sensors 2024, 24(1), 233; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24010233
Submission received: 21 November 2023 / Revised: 19 December 2023 / Accepted: 28 December 2023 / Published: 30 December 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sensing Technology in Virtual Reality)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 

Characterization of Upper Extremity Kinematics Using Virtual Reality Movement Tasks and Wearable IMU Technology

An interesting experimental work that can be improved:

1. The Authors must include an information for the other nine males – kilograms, height, etc.? If the Authors decide it would be better to include a Table with all participants info - weight, height, ....

2. The Abstract and Conclusions can be improved. 

Improvement. Based on the proposed corrections and others, these two
paragraphs should be rewritten clearly and in depth. In the Abstract must be
included the main conclusions and the authors must underline the own
contributions.
In the Conclusion and in the Abstract
it is good, in my opinion, that they emphasize
their contributions and innovations clearly and boldly.

The unwritten rule is that most readers only look at these paragraphs – abstract and conclusions.

 3. The References can be enriched with the same from the last 5 years.

Eight of twenty-four references are from the last 5 years 2019 – 2023.

4. In the Introduction the Authors should add a brief summary of similar studies, as well as to
underline their own approach improvements in comparison with the other investigations.
5. A male-female Upper Extremity Kinematics comparison would be interesting to me.  
I personally really liked the way the results were presented.

I hope that the proposed corrections will increase the quality of the manuscript and possibly its citability.



Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for inviting me to review this manuscript.
This work investigates VR system usage for locomotor rehabilitation.

This work is well written, chosen topic is perspective. The research design appropriate. 

As an addition I would recommend to improve the introduction and add more references.

Moreover, please add some information about next stages of your research

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for study.    The number of subjects in the article is quite small, but I think it will be useful to evaluate Characterization of Upper Extremity Kinematics Using Virtual 2 Reality Movement Tasks and Wearable IMU Technology.

There are a few points that should be added in the Method section.

 

Inclusion and exclusion criteria can be clearly explained. 

In the Discussion section, the results of studies conducted on some pathologies may be included. The recommendations recommended to be applied to patients given in the conclusion section may be supportive. There are many studies in the clinic where virtual reality is used in treatment.

Author Response

Please see attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Back to TopTop