MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412602714 · doi:10.1016/j.aehs.2025.07.001

Clinician-accessible motor assessment with surface EMG: Key parameters and reliability

2025· article· en· W4412602714 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen L. Toepp, Ravjot S. Rehsi, Anika L. Syroid, Aimee J. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvanced Exercise and Health Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsReliability (semiconductor)Key (lock)Physical medicine and rehabilitationReliability engineeringComputer scienceMedicineEngineeringComputer securityPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the evident value of surface electromyography (EMG) in neurorehabilitation, its clinical use is limited. Researchers have developed many sophisticated EMG methods to test scientific hypotheses and address technical issues. However, there is a lack of simple and easily reproduced (i.e., clinician-accessible) procedures with available reference literature to support interpretation. To make EMG assessments accessible and interpretable for clinicians, we propose a template for surface EMG acquisition and data analysis using stereotyped movements and manual cursor placements. We apply our template by creating a simple protocol for measuring the root mean square (RMS) and mean frequency (MNF) of the EMG signal in active muscles during hand opening, wrist extension and flexion, and elbow flexion. In 36 healthy males and females, we assess interclass correlations (ICCs) to evaluate the relative inter-rater reliability of manual cursor placements, and the relative inter-session reliability of the MNF and RMS values. We also assess smallest detectible change (SDC) between assessments as a function of the number of contributing measurements (i.e., repetitions). Manual cursor placement exhibited excellent inter-rater reliability (ICC > 0.9) and inter-session reliability of MNF and RMS feature measurements was good (0.75 > ICC > 0.9) or excellent. As expected, SDCs decreased as movement repetitions increased. Compared to a single RMS measurement, taking the 14-repetition mean lowered SDC 95 by 21% for elbow flexion, 118% for wrist extension, 66% for wrist flexion and 15% for hand opening. Compared to a single MNF value taking a 14-reepetion mean reduces the SDC 95 by 3 Hz for elbow flextion, 4 Hz for wrist extension, 5 Hz for wrist flexion, and 4 Hz for hand opening. We demonstrate a clinician-accessible template for reliable EMG assessment, and an intuitive approach to interpreting changes in the obtained measurements. Designing protocols explicitly for broad use by clinicians will be necessary to advance clinical acceptance and integration of the modality into practice.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.705
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvanced Exercise and Health ScienceSame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207