MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2072711276 · doi:10.1002/mus.21692

Effect of maximal voluntary contraction on the amplitude of the compound muscle action potential: Implications for the interpolated twitch technique

2010· article· en· W2072711276 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Berger, Bradley V. Watson, Timothy J. Doherty

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIsometric exerciseAntidromicVastus medialisCompound muscle action potentialElectromyographyMedicineElectrophysiologyContraction (grammar)Stimulus (psychology)Refractory periodAnatomyCardiologyInternal medicineAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The compound muscle action potential (M(MAX)) during a maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) may be measured to determine if the motor nerve has been supramaximally stimulated during the interpolated twitch technique (ITT). Ten males performed isometric knee extension MVCs. M(MAX) for the vastus medialis was recorded during MVC and rest. To examine the effect of stimulating electrode movement, the M(MAX) of the thenar group and antidromic sensory nerve action potentials (SNAPs) to the third digit were recorded in a separate experiment. M(MAX) during MVC was reduced by 18% (P < 0.0001) and 43% (p < 0.0001) for the quadriceps and thenar group, respectively. The SNAP amplitude was not different between rest and MVC (P = 0.18). Reduction of M(MAX) during MVC suggests that some motor axons are refractory and unable to respond to a superimposed maximal stimulus. These results have implications for the sensitivity of the interpolated twitch technique.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.723
Threshold uncertainty score0.317

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207