Reliability of the biceps brachii M-wave
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The peak-to-peak (P-P) amplitude of the maximum M-wave and the area of the negative phase of the curve are important measures that serve as methodological controls in H-reflex studies, motor unit number estimation (MUNE) procedures, and normalization factors for voluntary electromyographic (EMG) activity. These methodologies assume, with little evidence, that M-wave variability is minimal. This study therefore examined the intraclass reliability of these measures for the biceps brachii. METHODS: Twenty-two healthy adults (4 males and 18 females) participated in 5 separate days of electrical stimulation of the musculocutaneous nerve supplying the biceps brachii muscle. A total of 10 stimulations were recorded on each of the 5 test sessions: a total of fifty trials were used for analysis. A two-factor repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) evaluated the stability of the group means across test sessions. The consistency of scores within individuals was determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The variance ratio (VR) was then used to assess the reproducibility of the shape of the maximum M-wave within individual subjects. RESULTS: The P-P amplitude means ranged from 12.62 +/- 4.33 mV to 13.45 +/- 4.07 mV across test sessions. The group means were highly stable. ICC analysis also revealed that the scores were very consistent (ICC = 0.98). The group means for the area of the negative phase of the maximum M-wave were also stable (117 to 126 mV.ms). The ICC analysis also indicated a high degree of consistency (ICC = 0.96). The VR for the sample was 0.244 +/- 0.169, which suggests that the biceps brachii maximum M-wave shape was in general very reproducible for each subject. CONCLUSION: The results support the use of P-P amplitude of the maximum M-wave as a methodological control in H-reflex studies, and as a normalization factor for voluntary EMG. The area of the negative phase of the maximum M-wave is both stable and consistent, and the shape of the entire waveform is highly reproducible and may be used for MUNE procedures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".