Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39438311›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of applied physiology2025

A comparison of electromyography techniques: surface versus intramuscular recording.

Ilhan Karacan, Kemal Sitki Türker

Abstract readReviewComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of applied physiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Muscle fibre denervation in ageing.Clinical science (London, England : 1979) · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

2 authors.

Ilhan KaracanHamidiye Medical School, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Department, Health Science University Istanbul, Istanbul, Türkiye.
Kemal Sitki TürkerFaculty of Dentistry, Department of Physiology, Istanbul Gelisim University, Avcilar, Istanbul, Türkiye. ksturker@gelisim.edu.tr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9962-075X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review is a comprehensive guide for electromyography (EMG) researchers, providing a comparison of skin EMG recording (surface EMG: sEMG and high-density sEMG: HD-sEMG) and intramuscular EMG recording (multi-motor unit-MMU and single motor unit electromyography-SMU). We delve into the nuances of techniques, highlighting their strengths and limitations in quantifying muscle activation during dynamic and static conditions. We first examine how EMG signals change with time, focussing on the interplay between motor unit synchronisation and signal amplitude. The review then explores the impact of electrode placement on signal quality. We further discuss the challenges of signal cancellation, crosstalk from neighbouring muscles, and motion artifacts, which can significantly affect signal integrity. Finally, we address the temporal changes in electrode impedance and its implications for data interpretation. Our analysis proposes that specific research objectives should guide the choice amongst sEMG, HD-sEMG, SMU and MMU. MMU, which records the peak counts of individual motor unit action potentials from a localised muscle area, is particularly suited for studying deep or small muscles during static and dynamic activities. Its high sensitivity to motor unit recruitment and discharge rates minimises the impact of factors such as signal cancellation and motion artefacts. Conversely, sEMG is well-suited for short-duration, isometric assessments of large, superficial muscles. HD-sEMG helps study single motor unit properties under isometric conditions. SMU is particularly suited for studying neuronal networks between stimulated sites and motor neurons. This review aims to provide researchers with the information to select the most appropriate EMG technique for their investigations.

Indexed as

ElectromyographyMuscle, SkeletalAction PotentialsHumansCrosstalkDynamic EMGElectromyography (EMG)High density sEMG (HD-sEMG)ImpedanceIntramuscular EMG (IM-EMG)Motion artifactMovement artifactMulti-motor unit (MMU)Single motor unit (SMU)Surface EMG (sEMG)

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.