## 1 Introduction  
Musculoskeletal tissue reacts to force through the capacity of perceiving and converting mechanical stimuli into biochemical activity [1, 2]. These physiological mechanisms allow bone and muscle cells to change their composition depending on the configuration of these forces in terms of direction, magnitude, frequency, and exposure [1, 2]. Whole-body vibration exercise (WBVE) is used as non-pharmacogical treatment and exercise modality to improve bone [3, 4] and muscle [5, 6] mass through the delivery of mechanical forcesinto the body structures. Although the configuration of the forces can be adjusted by the frequency and displacement settings of the platforms, the adopted posture has also been shown to be decisive in the forces that are ultimately transmitted to the human body [7]. The positive effects reported in rehabilitation, sport, fitness, and preventive medicine [7] have led to the development of different models of platforms and vibration devices [8; 9]; however, research findings in the WBVE literature are inconsistent [10], and even harmful effects have been warned of [11]. As a result, the generation of consistent and comprehensive knowledge about WBVE safety and application becomes hindered. Furthermore, many of the WBVE research findings have not been replicated [12; 13; 14; 15]. Resulting from methodological issues and inconsistencies reported in the literature, researchers have called for the accurate reporting of protocols and performance of specific vibration platform models [12; 13; 14; 15]. For this, the provision of standardised vibration parameters of specific vibration platforms and protocols has been recommended [13; 15]. The standard parameters utilised in WBVE prescription include frequency, displacement, and acceleration. Because of the variations that arise from different characteristics of both the platform (i.e., dimensions, motors, and materials) and of each performed trial--consisting of the setting (platform frequency and displacement), the participant (i.e., weight and balance), and the posture--the platform inputs [12; 14; 16; 17; 18; 19] and the transmitted vibration forces at each body site [17; 20; 21; 22; 23] differ from the initial platform setting of frequency (\(f_{\text{set}}\)) and displacement (\(D_{\text{set}}\)). In addition, the transmission mechanism of the vibration stimulus across the human body is strongly non-linear [21; 22; 24; 25]. As a consequence, the configuration of the forces (i.e., frequency and magnitude) delivered into the cells (i.e., bone and muscle) to change their composition is unknown. Thus, in order to generate consistent and comprehensive knowledge, the most accurate way to provide the parameters should be recorded on the platform and on the body simultaneously for each assessed trial [14; 17]. On the one hand, although there are guidelines to report vibration platform parameters, these are not common practices [12; 13; 15]. Moreover, these recommendations are especially important when a new platform is introduced because its specific behaviour, due to its characteristics (i.e., dimensions, motors, materials) [12; 13; 14], has not been reported previously. On the other hand, regarding human body transmission, no standard guidelines have yet been reported. Based on the available literature, due to the discrepancies between vibration platform settings and the vibration applied by the platform, to inform of the vibration platform feasibility, studies reported the vibration applied by the platform of frequency (\(f_{\text{in}}\)) [26; 27], signal purity (\(P_{\text{in}}\)) [25], displacement (\(D_{\text{in}}\)) [16; 28], and/or acceleration (\(a_{\text{in}}\)) [16; 17; 20; 26]. Overall, \(f_{\text{in}}\) and \(P_{\text{in}}\) are better maintained than \(D_{\text{in}}\) and \(a_{\text{in}}\).