ArticleMuscle & nerve2024
F wave analysis based on the compound muscle action potential scan.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Characterizing repeater F waves using the compound muscle action potential scan and machine learning techniques.Neurophysiologie clinique = Clinical neurophysiology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
INTRODUCTION/
aimsConventional F wave analysis involves a relatively uniform physiological environment induced by supramaximal stimulations. The F wave characteristics in a dynamic physiological condition, however, are rarely investigated. This study aimed to improve understanding of F wave properties in the more dynamic process by introducing a novel method to analyze F waves based on the compound muscle action potential (CMAP) scan technique.
methodsTwenty four healthy subjects participated in the study. The CMAP scan was applied to record muscle responses in the abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM) muscles, respectively. F wave characteristics including mean F wave amplitude and latency (F-M latency), persistence and activating threshold were quantified.
resultsAn average of 200 F waves per muscle were obtained from the CMAP scan recording. Weak to moderate correlations between F wave amplitude and stimulating intensity were observed in most of the APB (19 muscles; r = 0.33 ± 0.14, all p < .05) and ADM (23 muscles, r = 0.46 ± 0.16, all p < .05) muscles. Significantly longer mean F latency and lower activating F-threshold were found in the ADM muscles (F-M latency: APB: 25.43 ± 2.39 ms, ADM: 26.15 ± 2.32 ms, p < .05; F-threshold: APB: 7.68 ± 8.96% CMAP, ADM: 2.35 ± 2.42% CMAP, p < .05). DISCUSSION: This study introduces new features of F waves using the CMAP scan technique and identifies differences of F wave characteristics between the hand muscles. The CMAP scan based F waves analysis can be combined with the motor unit number estimation to assess functional alterations in motor neurons in neurological disorders.
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.