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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Interpreting Signal Amplitudes in Surface Electromyography Studies in Sport and Rehabilitation Sciences
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Physiology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fphys.2017.00985 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Andrew D. Vigotsky, Israel Halperin, Gregory J. Lehman, Gabriel S. Trajano, Taian M. Vieira |
| Abstract |
Surface electromyography (sEMG) is a popular research tool in sport and rehabilitation sciences. Common study designs include the comparison of sEMG amplitudes collected from different muscles as participants perform various exercises and techniques under different loads. Based on such comparisons, researchers attempt to draw conclusions concerning the neuro- and electrophysiological underpinning of force production and hypothesize about possible longitudinal adaptations, such as strength and hypertrophy. However, such conclusions are frequently unsubstantiated and unwarranted. Hence, the goal of this review is to discuss what can and cannot be inferred from comparative research designs as it pertains to both the acute and longitudinal outcomes. General methodological recommendations are made, gaps in the literature are identified, and lines for future research to help improve the applicability of sEMG are suggested. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 156 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 25 | 16% |
| United Kingdom | 15 | 10% |
| Canada | 13 | 8% |
| Spain | 8 | 5% |
| Australia | 7 | 4% |
| Italy | 4 | 3% |
| Switzerland | 3 | 2% |
| Brazil | 3 | 2% |
| Ireland | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 26 | 17% |
| Unknown | 49 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 94 | 60% |
| Scientists | 53 | 34% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 5% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | <1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 691 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 691 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 108 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 95 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 93 | 13% |
| Researcher | 50 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 44 | 6% |
| Other | 120 | 17% |
| Unknown | 181 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sports and Recreations | 153 | 22% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 72 | 10% |
| Engineering | 65 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 64 | 9% |
| Neuroscience | 23 | 3% |
| Other | 90 | 13% |
| Unknown | 224 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 110. 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 19 January 2024.
All research outputs
#387,722
of 25,744,802 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#215
of 15,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,774
of 452,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#9
of 308 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,744,802 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 15,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 452,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 308 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.