ArticleExperimental brain research2020
Does strict validation criteria for individual motor units alter population-based regression models of the motor unit pool?
Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential motor unit firing rate and hypertrophic adaptations of the vastus lateralis despite similar strength increases following high-load versus combined high- and low-load resistance training interventions.Experimental brain research · 2026Article
- Analysis of motor units with high-density surface electromyography: methodological considerations and physiological significance.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Review
- Motor unit firing rates during slow and fast contractions in boys and men.European journal of applied physiology · 2024Article
- Motor unit firing rates increase in prepubescent youth following linear periodization resistance exercise training.European journal of applied physiology · 2024Article
- A comparison of techniques for verifying the accuracy of precision decomposition-derived relationships between motor unit firing rates and recruitment thresholds from surface EMG signals.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Resistance exercise training and the motor unit.European journal of applied physiology · 2022Review
- The reliability of the slopes and y-intercepts of the motor unit firing times and action potential waveforms versus recruitment threshold relationships derived from surface electromyography signal decomposition.European journal of applied physiology · 2021Article
- Motor unit action potential amplitude during low torque fatiguing contractions versus high torque non-fatiguing contractions: a multilevel analysis.European journal of applied physiology · 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
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine if the implementation of a strict validation procedure, designed to limit the inclusion of inaccuracies from the decomposition of surface electromyographic (sEMG) signals, affects population-based motor unit (MU) analyses. Four sEMG signals were obtained from the vastus lateralis of 59 participants during isometric contractions at different relative intensities [30%, 70%, and 100% of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC)], and its individual motor unit potential trains (MUPTs) were extracted. The MUPTs were then excluded (ISIval) based on the coefficient of variation and histogram of the interspike intervals (ISI), the absence of additional clusters that reveals missed or additional firings, and more. MU population-based regression models (i.e., modeling the entire motor unit pool) were performed between motor unit potential size (MUP
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.