Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35705997›Full record

ArticleBMC research notes2022

Comparison of decomposition algorithms for identification of single motor units in ultrafast ultrasound image sequences of low force voluntary skeletal muscle contractions.

Robin Rohlén, Jun Yu, Christer Grönlund

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC research notes, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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.

Robin RohlénDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden. robin.rohlen@umu.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4328-5467
Jun YuDepartment of Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Christer GrönlundDepartment of Radiation Sciences, Biomedical Engineering, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden.
Umeå University · SE

Funding

Kempestiftelserna JCK-1115Vetenskapsrådet 2015-04461
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIn this study, the aim was to compare the performance of four spatiotemporal decomposition algorithms (stICA, stJADE, stSOBI, and sPCA) and parameters for identifying single motor units in human skeletal muscle under voluntary isometric contractions in ultrafast ultrasound image sequences as an extension of a previous study. The performance was quantified using two measures: (1) the similarity of components' temporal characteristics against gold standard needle electromyography recordings and (2) the agreement of detected sets of components between the different algorithms.

resultsWe found that out of these four algorithms, no algorithm significantly improved the motor unit identification success compared to stICA using spatial information, which was the best together with stSOBI using either spatial or temporal information. Moreover, there was a strong agreement of detected sets of components between the different algorithms. However, stJADE (using temporal information) provided with complementary successful detections. These results suggest that the choice of decomposition algorithm is not critical, but there may be a methodological improvement potential to detect more motor units.

Indexed as

Motor NeuronsMuscle ContractionAlgorithmsElectromyographyHumansIsometric ContractionMuscle, SkeletalBlind source separationConcentric needle electromyographyDecomposition algorithmsMotor unitsUltrafast ultrasound

Identifiers

PMID35705997
PMCPMC9202224
OpenAlexW4282943203

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.