Trial reportScientific reports2019
Association of anthropometric parameters with amplitude and crosstalk of mechanomyographic signals during forearm flexion, pronation and supination torque tasks.
Trial report in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Estimation of elbow flexion torque from anthropometric and NMES MMG variables using random forest regression.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- MMG-Based Knee Dynamic Extension Force Estimation Using Cross-Talk and IGWO-LSTM.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Effect of Forearm Postures and Elbow Joint Angles on Elbow Flexion Torque and Mechanomyography in Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation of the Biceps Brachii.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Analysis of anthropometrics and mechanomyography signals as forearm flexion, pronation and supination torque predictors.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Fatigue effect on cross-talk in mechanomyography signals of extensor and flexor forearm muscles during maximal voluntary isometric contractions.Journal of musculoskeletal & neuronal interactions · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to quantify the association of four anthropometric parameters of the human arm, namely, the arm circumference (CA), arm length (LA), skinfold thickness (ST) and inter-sensor distance (ISD), with amplitude (RMS) and crosstalk (CT) of mechanomyography (MMG) signals. Twenty-five young, healthy, male participants were recruited to perform forearm flexion, pronation and supination torque tasks. Three accelerometers were employed to record the MMG signals from the biceps brachii (BB), brachialis (BRA) and brachioradialis (BRD) at 80% maximal voluntary contraction (MVC). Signal RMS was used to quantify the amplitude of the MMG signals from a muscle, and cross-correlation coefficients were used to quantify the magnitude of the CT among muscle pairs (BB & BRA, BRA & BRD, and BB & BRD). For all investigated muscles and pairs, RMS and CT showed negligible to low negative correlations with CA, LA and ISD (r = -0.0001--0.4611), and negligible to moderate positive correlations with ST (r = 0.004-0.511). However, almost all of these correlations were statistically insignificant (p > 0.05). These findings suggest that RMS and CT values for the elbow flexor muscles recorded and quantified using accelerometers appear invariant to anthropometric parameters.
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.