Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28056494›Full record

ArticleMuscle & nerve2017

Sensitivity distribution simulations of surface electrode configurations for electrical impedance myography.

Seward B Rutkove, Adam Pacheck, Benjamin Sanchez

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Muscle & nerve, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Electrical impedance myography: A critical review and outlook.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Electrical Impedance Methods in Neuromuscular Assessment: An Overview.Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine · 2019
    Review
  15. Exploring the relationship between electrical impedance myography and quantitative ultrasound parameters in Duchenne muscular dystrophy.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2019
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Seward B RutkoveDepartment of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, DA-0730A, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, Masachusetts, 02215-5491, USA.
Adam PacheckDepartment of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, DA-0730A, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, Masachusetts, 02215-5491, USA.
Benjamin SanchezDepartment of Neurology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, DA-0730A, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, Masachusetts, 02215-5491, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1594-9847
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · US

Funding

Innovative Ultrasound Technology in Neuromuscular DiseaseK24NS060951 · NINDS · BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER · PI RUTKOVE, SEWARD B. · 2008 to 2017
$1.5M
NINDS NIH HHS K24 NS060951
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSurface-based electrical impedance myography (EIM) is sensitive to muscle condition in neuromuscular disorders. However, the specific contribution of muscle to the obtained EIM values is unknown.

methodsWe combined theory and the finite element method to calculate the electrical current distribution in a 3-dimensional model using different electrode array designs and subcutaneous fat thicknesses (SFTs). Through a sensitivity analysis, we decoupled the contribution of muscle from other surrounding tissues in the measured surface impedance values.

resultsThe contribution of muscle to surface EIM values varied greatly depending on the electrode array size and the SFT. For example, the contribution of muscle with 6-mm SFT was 8% for a small array compared with 32% for a large array.

conclusionsThe approach presented can be employed to inform the design of robust EIM electrode configurations that maximize the contribution of muscle across the disease and injury spectrum. Muscle Nerve 56: 887-895, 2017.

Indexed as

Computer SimulationElectric ImpedanceModels, BiologicalMyographyAnimalsHumansMuscle, SkeletalSensitivity and SpecificitySubcutaneous Fatelectrical impedance myographyelectrodeselectrophysiological measurementmusclesubcutaneous fat

Identifiers

PMID28056494
PMCPMC5498265
OpenAlexW2568585981

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.