MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391260613 · doi:10.1186/s12938-024-01200-8

A dry polymer nanocomposite transcutaneous electrode for functional electrical stimulation

2024· article· en· W4391260613 on OpenAlex

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

VenueBioMedical Engineering OnLine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectrodeMaterials scienceFunctional electrical stimulationBiomedical engineeringNanocompositeAdhesiveComposite materialStimulationPolymerMedicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Functional electrical stimulation (FES) can be used in rehabilitation to aid or improve function in people with paralysis. In clinical settings, it is common practice to use transcutaneous electrodes to apply the electrical stimulation, since they are non-invasive, and can be easily applied and repositioned as necessary. However, the current electrode options available for transcutaneous FES are limited and can have practical disadvantages, such as the need for a wet interface with the skin for better comfort and performance. Hence, we were motivated to develop a dry stimulation electrode which could perform equivalently or better than existing commercially available options. METHODS: We manufactured a thin-film dry polymer nanocomposite electrode, characterized it, and tested its performance for stimulation purposes with thirteen healthy individuals. We compared its functionality in terms of stimulation-induced muscle torque and comfort level against two other types of transcutaneous electrodes: self-adhesive hydrogel and carbon rubber. Each electrode type was also tested using three different stimulators and different intensity levels of stimulation. RESULTS: We found the proposed dry polymer nanocomposite electrode to be functional for stimulation, as there was no statistically significant difference between its performance to the other standard electrodes. Namely, the proposed dry electrode had comparable muscle torque generated and comfort level as the self-adhesive hydrogel and carbon rubber electrodes. From all combinations of electrode type and stimulators tested, the dry polymer nanocomposite electrode with the MyndSearch stimulator had the most comfortable average rating. CONCLUSIONS: The dry polymer nanocomposite electrode is a durable and flexible alternative to existing self-adhesive hydrogel and carbon rubber electrodes, which can be used without the addition of a wet interfacing agent (i.e., water or gel) to perform as well as the current electrodes used for stimulation purposes.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.669
Threshold uncertainty score0.783

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.262
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