ArticleIEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society2011
Rigorous a posteriori assessment of accuracy in EMG decomposition.
Article in IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exact inter-discharge interval distribution of motor unit firing patterns with gamma model.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2019Article
- Error reduction in EMG signal decomposition.Journal of neurophysiology · 2014Article
- Accuracy assessment of CKC high-density surface EMG decomposition in biceps femoris muscle.Journal of neural engineering · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
If electromyography (EMG) decomposition is to be a useful tool for scientific investigation, it is essential to know that the results are accurate. Because of background noise, waveform variability, motor-unit action potential (MUAP) indistinguishability, and perplexing superpositions, accuracy assessment is not straightforward. This paper presents a rigorous statistical method for assessing decomposition accuracy based only on evidence from the signal itself. The method uses statistical decision theory in a Bayesian framework to integrate all the shape- and firing-time-related information in the signal to compute an objective a posteriori measure of confidence in the accuracy of each discharge in the decomposition. The assessment is based on the estimated statistical properties of the MUAPs and noise and takes into account the relative likelihood of every other possible decomposition. The method was tested on 3 pairs of real EMG signals containing 4-7 active MUAP trains per signal that had been decomposed by a human expert. It rated 97% of the identified MUAP discharges as accurate to within ± 0.5 ms with a confidence level of 99%, and detected six decomposition errors. Cross-checking between signal pairs verified all but two of these assertions. These results demonstrate that the approach is reliable and practical for real EMG signals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.