Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 279

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A method for estimating the number of motor units in thenar muscles and the changes in motor unit count with ageing

Open access
Brown, W. F.·1972·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

A method for estimating the number of motor units in median innervated thenar muscles is described. In normal human subjects under 40 years of age, the mean and 1 SD was 253+34. The number of motor units falls with increasing age, especially after mid life, so that elderly subjects often have less than one-half the number in youth despite good strength. The cause is not known but probably includes peripheral nerve trauma and `primary neuronal cell death'.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jnnp.35.6.845

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Brown, W. F.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1972-12-01
Volume
35
Issue
6
Pages
845-852
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2132905212
Cited by
279
References
0
FWCI
12.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.