MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4407841186 · doi:10.1089/ains.2024.0009

Investigating Muscle Electrophysiological Profiles after Cervical Spinal Cord Injury Through Surface Electromyography Clustering Analysis

2025· article· en· W4407841186 on OpenAlexaff
Guijin Li, Gustavo Balbinot, Julio C. Furlan, Sukhvinder Kalsi‐Ryan, José Zariffa

Bibliographic record

VenueAI in neuroscience. · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityToronto Rehabilitation InstituteUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersCongressionally Directed Medical Research ProgramsWings for Life
KeywordsElectromyographyElectrophysiologyMedicineSpinal cord injurySpinal cordAnatomyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Cervical spinal cord injuries (SCIs) result in significant neurological and functional impairments. Current clinical assessments, such as the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury, provide essential diagnostic and prognostic insights but have limited sensitivity in detecting residual motor control. This study aims to investigate whether surface electromyography (sEMG) signals can reveal distinct electrophysiological profiles that complement clinical information, potentially enhancing the assessment of SCI. Methods: sEMG signals were recorded from 184 upper extremity muscle groups across 22 adult individuals with cervical SCI. Time and frequency domain features were extracted. Multiple clustering algorithms, including k-means, k-medoids, density-based spatial clustering of applications with noise, and hierarchical clustering, were applied to identify distinct sEMG profiles. Internal validation metrics (Silhouette scores) and resampling-based robustness assessments were used to confirm the reliability of the clusters. Identified clusters were evaluated for their associations with clinical variables, including neurological level of injury (NLI), American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale scores, myotome levels, manual muscle testing scores, and lower motor neuron injury status. Results: Distinct and reproducible clusters were identified, and significant associations were found between the sEMG clusters and clinical variables, particularly the myotome level and NLI. However, the clusters were not fully explained by clinical variables, indicating that sEMG may capture additional physiological nuances, such as residual motor pathways or compensatory mechanisms, that are not readily assessed through standard clinical evaluations. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that in individuals with cervical SCI, sEMG-based clustering identified distinct muscle electrophysiological profiles. These profiles are partially aligned with clinical variables. Yet the additional dimensions captured by sEMG may have the potential to enhance neurological assessments and improve the clinical management of SCI. These findings underscore the need for further research with larger and more diverse datasets to validate the clinical relevance of sEMG clusters and explore their implications for rehabilitation strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAI in neuroscience.→Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→