ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Motion Tape Strain During Trunk Muscle Engagement in Young, Healthy Participants.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Multi-Sensor, Multi-Movement Exploratory Study of Motion Tape Strain Data for Low Back Pain Classification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Movement-Based Low Back Pain Subgroups Using Motion Tape Strain Data with Biomechanical and Causal Feature Engineering.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Assessing Low Back Movement with Motion Tape Sensor Data Through Deep Learning.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Wearable sensor technologies for individuals with back pain: a scoping review.Pain management · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMotion Tape (MT) is a low-profile, disposable, self-adhesive wearable sensor that measures skin strain. Preliminary studies have validated MT for measuring lower back movement. However, further analysis is needed to determine if MT can be used to measure lower back muscle engagement. The purpose of this study was to measure differences in MT strain between conditions in which the lower back muscles were relaxed versus maximally activated.
methodsTen participants without low back pain were tested. A matrix of six MTs was placed on the lower back, and strain data were captured under a series of conditions. The first condition was a baseline trial, in which participants lay prone and the muscles of the lower back were relaxed. The subsequent trials were maximum voluntary isometric contractions (MVICs), in which participants did not move, but resisted the examiner force in extension or rotational directions to maximally engage their lower back muscles. The mean MT strain was calculated for each condition. A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to analyze the effects of conditions (baseline, extension, right rotation, and left rotation) and MT position (1-6) on the MT strain. Post hoc analyses were conducted for significant effects from the overall analysis.
resultsThe results of the ANOVA revealed a significant main effect of condition (
conclusionsMT can capture maximal lower back muscle engagement while the trunk remains in a stationary position. Lower sensors are better able to capture muscle engagement than upper sensors. Furthermore, MT captured muscle engagement during rotation conditions better than during extension.
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.