Evidence map›Paper›PMID 15243732›Full record

Trial reportExperimental brain research2004

Short-term effects of functional electrical stimulation on motor-evoked potentials in ankle flexor and extensor muscles.

Aiko Kido Thompson, Richard B Stein

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Experimental brain research, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 97 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aiko Kido ThompsonCentre for Neuroscience, 513 Heritage Medical Research Centre, University of Alberta, T6G 2S2 Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Richard B Stein
University of Alberta · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stimulating sensory afferents can increase corticospinal excitability. Intensive use of a particular part of the body can also induce reorganization of neural circuits (use-dependent plasticity) in the central nervous system (CNS). What happens in the CNS when the nerve stimulation is applied in concert with the use of particular muscle groups? The purpose of this study was to investigate short-term effects of electrical stimulation of the common peroneal (CP) nerve during walking on motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in the ankle flexors and extensors in healthy subjects. Since the stimulation was applied during the swing phase of the step cycle when the ankle flexors are active, this is referred to as functional electrical stimulation (FES). The following questions were addressed: (1) can FES during walking increase corticospinal excitability more effectively than passively received repetitive nerve stimulation and (2) does walking itself improve the descending connection. FES was delivered using a foot drop stimulator that activates ankle dorsiflexors during the swing phase of the step cycle. MEPs in the tibialis anterior (TA) and soleus muscles were measured before, between, and after periods of walking with or without FES, using transcranial magnetic stimulation. After 30 min of walking with FES, the half-maximum peak-to-peak MEP (MEP(h)) in the TA increased in amplitude and this facilitatory effect lasted for at least 30 min. In contrast, walking had no effects on the TA MEP(h) without FES. The increase in the TA MEP(h) with FES (approximately 40%) was similar to that with repetitive CP nerve stimulation at rest. The soleus MEP(h) was also increased after walking with FES, but not without FES, which differs from the previous observation with CP nerve stimulation at rest. With FES, the TA silent period at MEP(h) was unchanged or slightly decreased, while it increased after walking without FES. Increased cortical excitability accompanied by unchanged cortical inhibition (no changes in the silent period with FES) suggests that FES did not simply increase general excitability of the cortex, but had specific effects on particular cortical neurons.

Indexed as

AdultAlgorithmsAnkleBiomechanical PhenomenaElectric StimulationElectromagnetic FieldsElectromyographyEvoked Potentials, MotorFemaleHumansLegMagnetoencephalographyMaleMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalNeuronal Plasticity

Identifiers

PMID15243732
OpenAlexW2079872266

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.