A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Identification of swallowing events from sEMG Signals Obtained from Healthy Adults. | LitMetric

Surface electromyography (sEMG) is being used with increasing frequency to identify the occurrence of swallowing, to describe swallow physiology, and to treat impaired swallowing function in dysphagic patients. Despite this increased utilization, limited information is available regarding the validity and reliability of investigators and clinicians to interpret sEMG data in reference to swallowing. This study examines the validity and interjudge reliability of swallow identification using sEMG records obtained from healthy adults. Validity and reliability estimates were compared between experienced and naïve judges in the identification of swallows from graphic sEMG records. Multiple validity estimates were high, indicating a strong degree of accuracy in identification of swallows versus nonswallow movements from sEMG traces. Experienced judges were more accurate than naïve judges (classification accuracy: experienced = 90% vs. naïve = 81%; p = 0.006, kappa: experienced = 0.89 vs. naïve 0.62; p = 0.008). Judges in both groups were more likely to classify swallows as nonswallow movements (false negatives) than to classify nonswallow movements as swallows (false positives). Interjudge reliability estimates indicated a high degree of agreement among judges in the identification of swallows versus nonswallow movements from the sEMG signal, with higher agreement among experienced judges (average kappa coefficient: experienced = 0.75 vs. naïve = 0.51). These results suggest that the sEMG graphic record is a valid and reliable tool for identifying normal swallows and that experience with this technique results in better identification and interjudge agreement.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00455-006-9059-yDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

nonswallow movements
16
identification swallows
12
semg
8
healthy adults
8
validity reliability
8
interjudge reliability
8
semg records
8
reliability estimates
8
naïve judges
8
judges identification
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!