ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020
Decoding Attempted Hand Movements in Stroke Patients Using Surface Electromyography.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Insights into motor impairment assessment using myographic signals with artificial intelligence: a scoping review.Biomedical engineering letters · 2025Review
- A Novel Bilateral Data Fusion Approach for EMG-Driven Deep Learning in Post-Stroke Paretic Gesture Recognition.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- RETRACTED: Optimizing the impact of time domain segmentation techniques on upper limb EMG decoding using multimodal features.PloS one · 2025Article
- Decoding hand and wrist movement intention from chronic stroke survivors with hemiparesis using a user-friendly, wearable EMG-based neural interface.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Empirical Myoelectric Feature Extraction and Pattern Recognition in Hemiplegic Distal Movement Decoding.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Supervised Myoelectrical Hand Gesture Recognition in Post-Acute Stroke Patients with Upper Limb Paresis on Affected and Non-Affected Sides.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Decoding of Ankle Joint Movements in Stroke Patients Using Surface Electromyography.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Induction of Neural Plasticity Using a Low-Cost Open Source Brain-Computer Interface and a 3D-Printed Wrist Exoskeleton.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Facial EMG Activity Is Associated with Hedonic Experiences but not Nutritional Values While Viewing Food Images.Nutrients · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Brain- and muscle-triggered exoskeletons have been proposed as a means for motor training after a stroke. With the possibility of performing different movement types with an exoskeleton, it is possible to introduce task variability in training. It is difficult to decode different movement types simultaneously from brain activity, but it may be possible from residual muscle activity that many patients have or quickly regain. This study investigates whether nine different motion classes of the hand and forearm could be decoded from forearm EMG in 15 stroke patients. This study also evaluates the test-retest reliability of a classical, but simple, classifier (linear discriminant analysis) and advanced, but more computationally intensive, classifiers (autoencoders and convolutional neural networks). Moreover, the association between the level of motor impairment and classification accuracy was tested. Three channels of surface EMG were recorded during the following motion classes: Hand Close, Hand Open, Wrist Extension, Wrist Flexion, Supination, Pronation, Lateral Grasp, Pinch Grasp, and Rest. Six repetitions of each motion class were performed on two different days. Hudgins time-domain features were extracted and classified using linear discriminant analysis and autoencoders, and raw EMG was classified with convolutional neural networks. On average, 79 ± 12% and 80 ± 12% (autoencoders) of the movements were correctly classified for days 1 and 2, respectively, with an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.88. No association was found between the level of motor impairment and classification accuracy (Spearman correlation: 0.24). It was shown that nine motion classes could be decoded from residual EMG, with autoencoders being the best classification approach, and that the results were reliable across days; this may have implications for the development of EMG-controlled exoskeletons for training in the patient's home.
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.