Reimagining robotic walkers for real-world outdoor play environments with insights from legged robots: a scoping review

References

• Prosser LA, Ohlrich LB, Curatalo LA, et al. Feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of a novel mobility training intervention in infants and toddlers with cerebral palsy. Dev Neurorehabil. 2012;15(4):259–266.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghazi M, Nash M, Fagg A, et al. Novel assistive device for teaching crawling skills to infants. In: Field and service robotics. Norman (OK): Springer; 2016. p. 593–605.
   Google Scholar
• Fernandes T. Independent mobility for children with disabilities. Int J Ther Rehabil. 2013;13(7):329–333.
   Google Scholar
• Cook AM, Polgar JM, Hussey SM, et al. Cook & Hussey’s assistive technologies: principles and practice. 2nd ed. Ridgeland (MS): Mosby Elsevier; 2008.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson MB. 514: rehabilitation engineering & design [Internet]. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania; 2018 [cited 2020 August 31]. Available from: https://catalog.upenn.edu/courses/be/
   Google Scholar
• Prosser LA. Introduction to pediatric rehabilitation. Presented at BE514 class meeting; 2021 Feb 10; University of Pennsylvania. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Lam R. Choosing the correct walking aid for patients. Can Fam Physician. 2007;53(12):2115–2116.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barnard AM, Nelson NG, Xiang H, et al. Pediatric mobility aid-related injuries treated in US emergency departments from 1991 to 2008. Pediatrics. 2010;125(6):1200–1207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farmer LW. Mobility devices. Bull Prosthet Res. 1978;1:47–118.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson KL, Dudgeon B, Kuehn C, et al. Assistive technology use among adolescents and young adults with spina bifida. Am J Public Health. 2007;97(2):330–336.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maher C, Crettenden A, Evans K, et al. Fatigue is a major issue for children and adolescents with physical disabilities. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2015;57(8):742–747.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Encarnação P. Fundamentals of robotic assistive technologies. In: Robotic assistive technologies: principles and practice. 1st ed. Abingdon (UK): Taylor & Francis Group; 2017. p. 24.
   Google Scholar
• Koenig A, Keller U, Pfluger K, et al. PASCAL: pediatric arm support robot for combined arm and leg training. Paper presented at the IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics; 2012 June 24–27; Rome, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Bayón C, Martín Lorenzo T, Moral B, et al. A robot-based gait training therapy for pediatric population with cerebral palsy: goal setting, proposal and preliminary clinical implementation. J NeuroEng and Rehabil. 2018;15:69.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saranli U, Buehler M, Koditschek DE. RHex: a simple and highly mobile hexapod robot. Int J Robo Res. 2001;20(7):616–631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valdastri P, Webster IIR, Quaglia C, et al. A new mechanism for mesoscale legged locomotion in compliant tubular environments. IEEE Trans Robot. 2009;25(5):1047–1057.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura H, Fukuoka Y, Cohen A. Adaptive dynamic walking of a quadruped robot on natural ground based on biological concepts. Int J Robo Res. 2007;26(5):475–490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mcgeer T. Passive dynamic walking. Int J Robo Res. 1990;9(2):62–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manchester I, Mettin U, Iida F, et al. Stable dynamic walking over uneven terrain. Int J Robo Res. 2011;30(3):265–279.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Data and statistics for cerebral palsy. Atlanta (GA): CDC; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Foundation CPAR. Facts about cerebral palsy. New York (NY): CPAR; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Bax M, Goldstein M, Rosenbaum P, et al. Proposed definition and classification of cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005;47(8):571–576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kraus L, Lauer E, Colemen R, et al. 2017 disability statistics annual report. Am Census Surv. 2018;1:1–64.
   Google Scholar
• Mai CT, Isenburg JL, Canfield MA, et al. National population-based estimates for major birth defects, 2010–2014. Birth Defects Res. 2019;111(18):1420–1435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. What is spina bifida?. 2019. Atlanta (GA): CDC.
   Google Scholar
• Williams J, Mai CT, Mulinare J, et al. Updated estimates of neural tube defects prevented by mandatory folic acid fortification – United States, 1995–2011. Morbidity Mortality Weekly Rep. 2015;64(1):1–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanborough RJ. Ages and stages: how to monitor child development. San Francisco (CA): Healthline; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Dosman CF, Andrews D, Goulden KJ. Evidence-based milestone ages as a framework for developmental surveillance. Paediatr Child Health. 2012;17(10):561–568.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goddard NDR, Kemp RMJ, Lane R. An overview of smart technology. Packag Technol Sci. 1997;10(3):129–143.
   Google Scholar
• Frizera-Neto A, Elias A, Cifuentes C, et al. Smart walkers: advanced robotic human walking-aid systems. In: Mohammed S, Moreno JC, Kong K, et al., editors. Intelligent assistive robots: recent advances in assistive robotics for everyday activities. New York (NY): Springer International Publishing; 2015. p. 103–131.
   Google Scholar
• Medline two-button folding walkers without wheels. 2020 [cited 2021 Feb 10]. Available from: https://punchout.medline.com/product/Two-Button-Folding-Walkers-without-Wheels/Walkers/Z05-PF05013
   Google Scholar
• Photograph by Barbara Hobbs, distributed under a CC-BY-2.0 license. Available from: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:My_rollator.jpg.
   Google Scholar
• Rossignol S, Dubuc R, Gossard JP. Dynamic sensorimotor interactions in locomotion. Physiol Rev. 2006;86(1):89–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Michmizos KP, Rossi S, Castelli E, et al. Robot-aided neurorehabilitation: a pediatric robot for ankle rehabilitation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2015;23(6):1056–1067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Agrawal SK, Kang J, Chen X, et al. Case studies of a robot enhanced walker for training of children with cerebral palsy. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems; 2013 November 3–7; Tokyo, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• McCormick A, Alazem H, Morbi A, et al. Power walker helps a child with cerebral palsy. Paper presented at the International Conference of Control, Dynamic Systems, and Robotics; 2016 May 9–10; Ottawa, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Raya R, Rocon E, Ceres R, et al. A mobile robot controlled by an adaptive inertial interface for children with physical and cognitive disorders. Paper presented at the International Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications (TePRA); 2012 April 23–24; Woburn, MA.
   Google Scholar
• Ragaja SR, Dinesh NS, Madhuri V, et al. Development and clinical evaluation of a posterior active walker for disabled children. J Intell Robot Syst. 2020;97(1):47–65.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang L, Yi J, Liu T. Gait adaptable human-robot interaction system and its application to a robotic walker. Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE 8th Annual International Conference on CYBER Technology in Automation, Control, and Intelligent Systems (CYBER); 2018 July 19–23; Tianjin, China.
   Google Scholar
• Morone G, Annicchiarico R, Iosa M, et al. Overground walking training with the i-walker, a robotic servo-assistive device, enhances balance in patients with subacute stroke: a randomized controlled trial. J NeuroEngineering Rehabil. 2016;13(1):47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lu CK, Huang YC, Lee CJ. Adaptive guidance system design for the assistive robotic walker. Neurocomputing. 2015;170:152–160.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oigawa K, Chugo D, Muramatsu S, et al. An assistive walker considering with its user’s gait difference of both feet. Paper presented at the 2019 12th International Conference on Human System Interaction (HSI); 2019 June 25–27; Richmond, VA.
   Google Scholar
• Cheng WC, Wu YZ. A user’s intention detection method for smart walker. Paper presented at the 2017 IEEE 8th International Conference on Awareness Science and Technology (iCAST); 2017 November 8–10; Taichung, Taiwan.
   Google Scholar
• Jiménez MF, Mello RC, Bastos T, et al. Assistive locomotion device with haptic feedback for guiding visually impaired people. Med Eng Phys. 2020;80:18–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ohnuma T, Lee G, Chong NY. Development of JARoW-II active robotic walker reflecting pelvic movements while walking. Intel Serv Robotics. 2017;10(2):95–107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werner C, Moustris GP, Tzafestas CS, et al. User-oriented evaluation of a robotic rollator that provides navigation assistance in frail older adults with and without cognitive impairment. Gerontology. 2018;64(3):278–290.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shin J, Itten D, Rusakov A, et al. SmartWalker: towards an intelligent robotic walker for the elderly. Paper presented at the 2015 International Conference on Intelligent Environments; 2015, July 15–17; Prague, Czech Republic.
   Google Scholar
• Kashyap P, Saleh M, Shakhbulatov D, et al. An autonomous simultaneous localization and mapping walker for indoor navigation. Paper presented at the 2018 IEEE 39th Sarnoff Symposium; 2018 September 24–25; Newark, NJ.
   Google Scholar
• Matsumoto O. Development of robotic rollators and walking trolleys in japan. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;242:457–464.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ogata K, Matsumoto Y. Estimating road surface and gradient using internal sensors for robot assist walker. Paper presented at the 2020 IEEE/SICE International Symposium on System Integration (SII); 2020 January 12–15; Honolulu, HI.
   Google Scholar
• Katz R. Agile walker. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2015;217:455–460.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Morone G, Paolucci S, Cherubini A, et al. Robot-assisted gait training for stroke patients: current state of the art and perspectives of robotics. NDT. 2017;13:1303–1311.
   Google Scholar
• Efthimiou E, Fotinea SE, Goulas T, et al. The MOBOT platform – showcasing multimodality in human-assistive robot interaction. Paper presented at the International Conference on Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction; 2016 July 17–22; Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Efthimiou E, Fotinea SE, Goulas T, et al. The MOBOT rollator human-robot interaction model and user evaluation process. Paper presented at the 2016 IEEE Symposium Series on Computational Intelligence (SSCI); 2016 December 6–9; Athens, Greece.
   Google Scholar
• Shin J, Rusakov A, Meyer B. SmartWalker: an intelligent robotic walker. AIS. 2016;8(4):383–398.
   Google Scholar
• McDonough D. Similarities and differences between adult and child learners as participants in the natural learning process. PSYCH. 2013;04(03):345–348.
   Google Scholar
• Lee G, Ohnuma T, Chong N, et al. Walking intent-based movement control for JAIST active robotic walker. IEEE Transact Syst, Man, Cybernet. 2014;44(5):665–672.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chuy O, Hirata Y, Wang Z, et al. Motion control algorithms for a new intelligent robotic walker in emulating ambulatory device function. Paper presented at the International Conference Mechatronics and Automation; 2005 July 20 to August 1; Piscataway, NJ.
   Google Scholar
• Waldron K, McGhee R. The adaptive suspension vehicle. IEEE Control Syst Mag. 1986;6(6):7–12.
   Google Scholar
• Loeb G. Control implications of musculoskeletal mechanics. Proceedings of 17th International Conference of the Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society; 1995 September 20–23; Montreal, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Jindrich DL, Full RJ. Dynamic stabilization of rapid hexapedal locomotion. J Exp Biol. 2002;205(18):2803–2823.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Full RJ, Autumn K, Chung J, et al. Rapid negotiation of rough terrain by the death-head cockroach. Am Zoologist. 1998;38(5):81A.
   Google Scholar
• Ghigliazza R, Altendorfer R, Holmes P, et al. A simply stabilized running model. SIAM J Appl Dyn Syst. 2003;2(2):187–218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altendorfer R, Koditschek DE, Holmes P. Stability analysis of a clock-driven rigid-body SLIP model for RHex. Int J Robo Res. 2004;23(10–11):1001–1012.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weingarten JD, Groff RE, Koditschek DE. A framework for the coordination of legged robot gaits. Paper presented at the IEEE Conference on Robotics, Automation and Mechatronics; 2004 December 1–3; Singapore, Singapore.
   Google Scholar
• Cham JG, Bailey SA, Clark JE, et al. Fast and robust: hexapedal robots via shape deposition manufacturing. Int J Robo Res. 2002;21(10–11):869–882.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peshkin MA, Sanderson AC. Minimization of energy in quasi-static manipulation. IEEE Trans Robot Automat. 1989;5(1):53–60.
   Google Scholar
• Blickhan R, Full RJ. Similarity in multilegged locomotion: Bouncing like a monopode. J Comp Physiol A. 1993;173(5):509–517.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raibert MH. Legged robots that balance. Cambridge (MA): Massachusetts Institute of Technology; 1986.
   Google Scholar
• Topping TT, Kenneally G, Koditschek DE. Quasi-static and dynamic mismatch for door opening and stair climbing with a legged robot. Paper presented at the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA); 2017 May 29 to June 3; Singapore, Singapore.
   Google Scholar
• Granosik G. Hypermobile robots – the survey. J Intell Robot Syst. 2014;75(1):147–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchanan R, Bandyopadhyay T, Bjelonic M, et al. Walking posture adaptation for legged robot navigation in confined spaces. IEEE Robot Autom Lett. 2019;4(2):2148–2155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hogan N. Impedance control: an approach to manipulation: Part i–theory. J Dyn Syst, Measure, Contr. 1985;107(1):1–7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawrence D, Pao L, Salada M, et al. Quantitative experimental analysis of transparency and stability in haptic interfaces. Paper presented at the Fifth Annual Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems; 1996 November; Atlanta, GA.
   Google Scholar
• Asada H, Youcef-Toumi K. Direct-drive robots: theory and practice. Cambridge (MA): MIT press; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Kenneally G, De A, Koditschek DE. Design principles for a family of direct-drive legged robots. IEEE Robo Autom Lett. 2016;1(2):900–907.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seok S, Wang A, Otten D, et al. Actuator design for high force proprioceptive control in fast legged locomotion. Paper presented at the 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems; 2012, October 7–12; Algarve, Portugal.
   Google Scholar
• Kenneally GD, Chen WH, Koditschek DE. Actuator transparency and the energetic cost of proprioception. Paper presented at the 2018 International Symposium on Experimental Robotics; 2018, November 5–8; Buenos Aires, Argentina.
   Google Scholar
• Altendorfer R, Moore N, Komsuolu H, et al. RHex: a biologically inspired hexapod runner. Autonomous Robo. 2001;11(3):207–213.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen S, Cheng-Hsin L, Cheng C, et al. Design of a leg-wheel hybrid mobile platform. Paper presented at the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems; 2009 October 11–15; St Louis, MO.
   Google Scholar
• Koditschek DE, Full RJ, Buehler M. Mechanical aspects of legged locomotion control. Arthropod Struct Dev. 2004;33(3):251–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pei-Chun L, Komsuoglu H, Koditschek DE. Sensor data fusion for body state estimation in a hexapod robot with dynamical gaits. IEEE Transact Robo. 2006;22(5):932–943.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopes GAD, Koditschek DE. Visual servoing for nonholonomically constrained three degree of freedom kinematic systems. Int J Robo Res. 2007;26(7):715–736.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bledt G, Powell MJ, Katz B, et al. MIT cheetah 3: design and control of a robust, dynamic quadruped robot. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS); 2018 October 1–5; Madrid, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Ackerman E. Agility robotics introduces Cassie, a dynamic and talented robot delivery ostrich. IEEE Spectr. 2017.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bjelonic M, Kottege N, Homberger T, et al.Weaver: hexapod robot for autonomous navigation on unstructured terrain. J Field Robotics. 2018;35(7):1063–1079. DOI:10.1002/rob.21795
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kod*lab. GHOST MINITAUR. 2016. Available from: https://kodlab.seas.upenn.edu/robots/ghost-minitaur/
   Google Scholar
• Bjelonic M, Kottege N, Beckerle P. Proprioceptive control of an over-actuated hexapod robot in unstructured terrain. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS); 2016 October 9–14; Daejeon, Korea.
   Google Scholar
• Galloway K, Haynes GC, Ilhan BD, et al. X-RHex: a highly mobile hexapedal robot for sensorimotor tasks. Philadelphia (PA): University of Pennsylvania; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Photograph by Oregon State University, distributed under a CC-BY-SA-2.0 license. Available from: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cassie_the_robot_02.jpg
   Google Scholar
• Photo by Paul Marotta/Getty Images for TechCrunch. Available from: https://www.flickr.com/photos/techcrunch/35824183002/in/photolist-WzEivC-5odskD-dkgAct-sRFnMw-7DUM6F-dkgA7Z-aw83qA-73QoxY-ejYgzz-8H6ad-ejYgAt-ek51Vy-ueeujQ-8H69Y-WQK5Ac-WzEiuf-ejYgyP-WQK5wK-VB7d5D-k7d2Mt-WQK5Be-EH1JUj-CewvC-WQK5qT-VB7d3e-VB7cZD-VB7d22-WzEiwE-23DL3ZF-zwa4vL-ERbgmj-24eWyCg-2hi6eSb-qYByAN-2kQSyRk-uuGQwc-5rcKrf-ePZNv6-2kRWic2-2kQTVPT-2kQQcNM-u14gJk-2kQSyJ6-2kQQcm6-2kQPMqs-2kQSyJB-2kQQfSh-2kQTWqH-2kQPMtt-2kQSyKU
   Google Scholar
• Haynes GC, Pusey JL, Knopf RR, et al. Laboratory on legs: an architecture for adjustable morphology with legged robots. Int Soc Opt Eng. 2012;8387:31.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson AM, Koditschek DE. Toward a vocabulary of legged leaping. Paper presented at the International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2013 May 6–10; Karlsruhe, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Moore E, Campbell D, Grimminger F, et al. Reliable stair climbing in the simple hexapod ‘RHex’. Paper presented at the International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA); 2002 May 11–15; Washington, DC.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson AM, Hale MT, Haynes GC, et al. Autonomous legged hill and stairwell ascent. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics; 2011 November 1–5; Kyoto, Japan.
   Google Scholar
• Spagna JC, Goldman DI, Lin PC, et al. Distributed mechanical feedback in arthropods and robots simplifies control of rapid running on challenging terrain. Bioinspir Biomim. 2007;2(1):9–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weingarten J, Lopes G, Buehler M, et al. Automated gait adaptation for legged robots. Paper presented at the International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA); 2004 April 26 to May 1; New Orleans, LA.
   Google Scholar
• De A, Koditschek DE. Vertical hopper compositions for preflexive and feedback-stabilized quadrupedal bounding, pacing, pronking, and trotting. Int J Robo Res. 2018;37(7):743–778.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Carlo J, Wensing PM, Katz B, et al. Dynamic locomotion in the MIT cheetah 3 through convex model-predictive control. Paper presented at the International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS); 2018 October 1–5; Madrid, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Seok S, Wang A, Chuah M, et al. Design principles for highly efficient quadrupeds and implementation on the MIT cheetah robot. Paper presented at the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2013 May 6–10; Karlsruhe, Germany.
   Google Scholar
• Bosworth W, Kim S, Hogan N. The MIT super mini cheetah: a small, low-cost quadrupedal robot for dynamic locomotion. Paper presented at the 2015 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics; 2015 October 18–20; West Lafayette, IN.
   Google Scholar
• Park HW, Park S, Kim S. Variable-speed quadrupedal bounding using impulse planning: untethered high-speed 3D running of MIT Cheetah 2. Paper presented at the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2015 May 25–30; Seattle, WA.
   Google Scholar
• Carroll J, Long D. Theory of finite automata with an introduction to formal languages. Hoboken (NJ): Prentice-Hall, Inc.; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Hyun DJ, Seok S, Lee J, et al. High speed trot-running: implementation of a hierarchical controller using proprioceptive impedance control on the MIT cheetah. Int J Robo Res. 2014;33(11):1417–1445.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gong Y, Hartley R, Da X, et al. Feedback control of a cassie bipedal robot: walking, standing, and riding a segway. Paper presented at the American Control Conference (ACC); 2019 July 10–12; Philadelphia, PA.
   Google Scholar
• Reher J, Ma WL, Ames AD. Dynamic walking with compliance on a Cassie bipedal robot. Paper presented at the 2019 European Control Conference (ECC); 2019 June 25–28; Naples, Italy.
   Google Scholar
• Xiong X, Ames A. Bipedal hopping: reduced-order model embedding via optimization-based control. Paper presented at the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems; 2018 October 1–5; Madrid, Spain.
   Google Scholar
• Xiong X, Ames A. Coupling reduced order models via feedback control for 3D underactuated bipedal robotic walking. Paper presented at the IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots; 2019 October 15–17; Toronto, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Clary P, Morais P, Fern A, et al. Monte-Carlo planning for agile legged locomotion. Paper presented at the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling; 2018 June 24–29; Delft, The Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Yaşar E, Adigüzel E, Arslan M, et al. Basics of bone metabolism and osteoporosis in common pediatric neuromuscular disabilities. Euro J Pediatr Neurol. 2018;22(1):17–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spurney C, Rabin J. Pediatric muscular dystrophies. 2019; Washington (DC): Children’s National Hospital.
   Google Scholar
• Bass PF, Turley RK, Joseph TN. Congenital limb defect in children. 2020; Rochester (NY): Stanford Children’s Health.
   Google Scholar
• Pugh S, Clausing D, Andrade R. Creating innovative products using total design: the living legacy of Stuart Pugh. Boston (MA): Addison-Wesley Publishing Company; 1996.
   Google Scholar
• Ulrich K, Eppinger S, Yang MC. Product design and development. 7th ed. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill; 2020.
   Google Scholar
• Dennis R. ME450: Pugh chart worksheet. 2001 [cited 2021 Feb 10]. Available from: www-personal.umich.edu/∼bobden/me450_pugh_chart.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pearson KG. Common principles of motor control in vertebrates and invertebrates. Annu Rev Neurosci. 1993;16(1):265–297.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tuthill JC, Azim E. Proprioception. Curr Biol. 2018;28(5):R194–R203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar