ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2026
Automatic Detection of Motor Unit Fractions in Multiscanning EMG Recordings.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThis study presents a novel algorithm for the automatic detection of motor unit (MU) fractions within the motor unit potential (MUP) scans derived from multiscanning EMG recordings. MU fractions are spatially distinct regions identified in the MUP scans that reflect the distribution of muscle fibres within each MU. Multiscanning EMG allows recording multiple MUPs simultaneously in a single recording, improving efficiency and reducing patient discomfort.
methodsThe algorithm combines amplitude thresholding, morphological operations, and connected component analysis to identify MU fractions. Algorithm performance was evaluated using MUP scans from tibialis anterior muscles of five healthy individuals. The analysis was performed in two ways: the first included all the fractions detected automatically, and the second included only those fractions detected in both the automatic and the ground truth. Additionally, the association between muscle depth, number of MU fractions, and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the recorded signals was analysed.
resultsT-tests showed no statistically significant difference between the algorithm and ground truth for both start and end markers. ANOVA indicated that muscle depth did not affect the signal-to-noise ratio (f = 1.06, p = 0.35). Overall, the algorithm reliably identified MU fractions.
conclusionThe proposed automatic method accurately detects MU fractions, providing a valuable tool for analysing motor unit activity in clinical and research settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41636959What 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.