ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of the trunk modules in the symmetrical and three-dimensional asymmetrical trunk positions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Modularity (Muscle synergy) is the concept that has been used to answer the question of how the central nervous system (CNS) coordinates the body's high degrees of freedom. This study aimed to investigate the trunk muscle synergies in symmetrical and asymmetrical positions. Fourteen healthy males participated. Electromyographical activities of 16 muscles were recorded during maximum voluntary isometric contraction (MVIC) in six main directions with two repetitions and maximum voluntary isometric extension (MVIE) of the trunk in 23 different three-dimensional trunk positions. Muscle synergies were extracted separately using non-negative matrix factorization during MVIC (with one/two repetitions) and MVIE. The effect of position changes on synergies was investigated using response surface models and the Pearson correlation coefficient. The findings show that 6 synergies for 6 directions MVIC and 2 synergies for MVIE are suitable with the variance accounted for of 99.65 ± 0.65 96 and 94.14 ± 1.59, respectively. Trial repetition does not affect the synergies. In Conclusion, during the same activity in different positions and trials, the synergy of the main activity is preserved. These show the stability of synergies and their dependence on the activity type. This stability may help to determine the main damage caused and provide appropriate treatment protocol for trunk injuries.
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.