ArticleMuscle & nerve2024
Electrical impedance myography in healthy volunteers.
Article in Muscle & nerve, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- A review of soluble mediator and cytokine networks linking combination immunotherapy, tumor microenvironment remodeling and skeletal muscle dysfunction.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Current insights in ultra-rare adenylosuccinate synthetase 1 myopathy - meeting report on the First Clinical and Scientific Conference. 3 June 2024, National Centre for Advancing Translational Science, Rockville, Maryland, the United States of America.Orphanet journal of rare diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
aimsElectrical impedance myography (EIM) is a noninvasive technique being used in clinical studies to characterize muscle by phase, reactance, and resistance after application of a low-intensity current. The aim of this study was to obtain 50-kHz EIM data from healthy volunteers (HVs) for use in future clinical and research studies, perform reliability tests on EIM outcome measures, and compare findings with muscle ultrasound variables.
methodsFour arm and four leg muscles of HVs were evaluated using an EIM device with two sensors, P/N 20-0045 and P/N 014-009. Muscles were evaluated individually and eight-muscle average (8MU), four-muscle upper extremity average, and four-muscle lower extremity average. An intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was applied to assess interrater, intrarater, and intersensor reliability using a subset of HVs. Ultrasound studies on muscle thickness and elastography were also performed on a subset of HVs.
resultsFor the P/N 20-0045 sensor, the 8MU EIM mean and standard deviation (n = 41) was 14.54 ± 3.31 for phase, 7.04 ± 1.22 for reactance, and 28.91 ± 7.63 for resistance. Reliability for 8MU phase (n = 22) was good to excellent for both interrater (n = 22, ICC = 0.920, 95% CI 0.820 to 0.966) and intrarater (n = 22, ICC = 0.950, 95% CI 0.778 to 0.983). The P/N 014-009 sensor had similar reliability findings. Correlation analyses showed no association between EIM and muscle thickness. DISCUSSION: EIM is a reproducible measure of muscle physiology. Obtaining EIM values from HVs allows us to gain a better understanding how EIM may be altered in diseased 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.