ArticleJournal of healthcare engineering2021
Interrater and Intrarater Reliability of Electrical Impedance Myography: A Comparison between Large and Small Handheld Electrode Arrays.
Article in Journal of healthcare engineering, 2021. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reliability of bioimpedance spectroscopy in the upper trapezius muscle.Journal of electromyography and kinesiology : official journal of the International Society of Electrophysiological Kinesiology · 2026Article
- Method of Forearm Muscles 3D Modeling Using Robotic Ultrasound Scanning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Electrical impedance myography combined with quantitative assessment techniques in paretic muscle of stroke survivors: Insights and challenges.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study was to evaluate the interrater and intrarater reliability of electrical impedance myography (EIM) using handheld sensors of different sizes. Electrical impedance myography of the biceps brachii muscle of twenty healthy individuals was performed by two raters using both large and small sensors. The procedures were also repeated 5 to 8 days after the first recording session. The repeatability of the resistance, reactance, and phase angle at two different current frequencies (50 and 100 kHz) was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The ICCs of the large sensor were higher than those of the small sensor for both the intrarater and interrater reliabilities. High-frequency current tended to improve the ICC for the small sensor. These results indicate reasonable repeatability of the handheld electrode arrays for EIM measurements. The findings suggest that electrode array should be selected appropriately according to the size of the tested muscle.
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.