MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140785628 · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2006.870490

The effect of random modulation of functional electrical stimulation parameters on muscle fatigue

2006· article· en· W2140785628 on OpenAlex
G. M. Graham, T. Adam Thrasher, Miloš R. Popović

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoHealth Canada
FundersSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsIsometric exerciseStimulationMuscle fatigueFunctional electrical stimulationBiomedical engineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMaterials scienceElectromyographyMedicinePhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muscle contractions induced by functional electrical stimulation (FES) tend to result in rapid muscle fatigue, which greatly limits activities such as FES-assisted standing and walking. It was hypothesized that muscle fatigue caused by FES could be reduced by randomly modulating parameters of the electrical stimulus. Seven paraplegic subjects participated in this study. While subjects were seated, FES was applied to quadriceps and tibialis anterior muscles bilaterally using surface electrodes. The isometric force was measured, and the time for the force to drop by 3 dB (fatigue time) and the normalized force-time integral (FTI) were determined. Four different modes of FES were applied in random order: constant stimulation, randomized frequency (mean 40 Hz), randomized current amplitude, and randomized pulsewidth (mean 250 micros). In randomized trials, stimulation parameters were stochastically modulated every 100 ms in a range of +/-15% using a uniform probability distribution. There was no significant difference between the fatigue time measurements for the four modes of stimulation. There was also no significant difference in the FTI measurements. Therefore, our particular method of stochastic modulation of the stimulation parameters, which involved moderate (15%) variations updated every 100 ms and centered around 40 Hz, appeared to have no effect on muscle fatigue. There was a strong correlation between maximum force measurements and stimulation order, which was not apparent in the fatigue time or FTI measurements. It was concluded that a 10-min rest period between stimulation trials was insufficient to allow full recovery of muscle strength.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.224
Threshold uncertainty score0.422

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.190 · 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