↓ Skip to main content

Spatial variation and inconsistency between estimates of onset of muscle activation from EMG and ultrasound

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (65th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Spatial variation and inconsistency between estimates of onset of muscle activation from EMG and ultrasound
Published in
Scientific Reports, February 2017
DOI 10.1038/srep42011
Pubmed ID
Authors

Angela V. Dieterich, Alberto Botter, Taian Martins Vieira, Anneli Peolsson, Frank Petzke, Paul Davey, Deborah Falla

Abstract

Delayed onset of muscle activation can be a descriptor of impaired motor control. Activation onset can be estimated from electromyography (EMG)-registered muscle excitation and from ultrasound-registered muscle motion, which enables non-invasive measurements in deep muscles. However, in voluntary activation, EMG- and ultrasound-detected activation onsets may not correspond. To evaluate this, ten healthy men performed isometric elbow flexion at 20% to 70% of their maximal force. Utilising a multi-channel electrode transparent to ultrasound, EMG and M(otion)-mode ultrasound were recorded simultaneously over the biceps brachii muscle. The time intervals between automated and visually estimated activation onsets were correlated with the regional variation of EMG and muscle motion onset, contraction level and speed. Automated and visual onsets indicated variable time intervals between EMG- and motion onset, median (interquartile range) 96 (121) ms and 48 (72) ms, respectively. In 17% (computed analysis) or 23% (visual analysis) of trials, motion onset was detected before local EMG onset. Multi-channel EMG and M-mode ultrasound revealed regional differences in activation onset, which decreased with higher contraction speed (Spearman ρ ≥ 0.45, P < 0.001). In voluntary activation the heterogeneous motor unit recruitment together with immediate motion transmission may explain the high variation of the time intervals between local EMG- and ultrasound-detected activation onset.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 107 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Student > Master 17 16%
Student > Bachelor 12 11%
Researcher 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 7%
Other 17 16%
Unknown 27 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 26 24%
Sports and Recreations 13 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 9 8%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Other 9 8%
Unknown 35 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 January 2024.
All research outputs
#7,458,998
of 22,952,268 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#50,657
of 123,919 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#143,097
of 420,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,708
of 4,052 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,952,268 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 67th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,919 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 58% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 420,410 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,052 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.