ArticleExperimental brain research2008
Differential effect of linguistic and non-linguistic pen-holding tasks on motor cortex excitability.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Slow (1 Hz) repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) induces a sustained change in cortical excitability in patients with Parkinson's disease.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2010Trial
- Safety of transcranial magnetic stimulation in Parkinson's disease: a review of the literature.Parkinsonism & related disorders · 2013Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Writing and drawing are unique human activities. They are complex high-precision actions, which involve not only the motor system but also various cognitive systems, such as attention, short-term memory, action control, and language. In relation to motor control, the study of writing and drawing is of great interest as they provide insight in the interaction between motor control processes and the concurrent non-motor processes. Although sharing similar motor and mechanical demands, writing and drawing involve different levels of linguistic/semantic load and thus may be associated with different modulation of motor cortical excitability. Here, we have used transcranial magnetic stimulation to study separately activation of excitatory and inhibitory mechanisms of the motor cortex during performance of writing and drawing acts as well as during simple pen-squeezing task. While cortical excitatory mechanisms appeared to be saturated by the pure motor demands of the tasks, and thus not amenable to modulation by the tasks' linguistic load, variation in cortical inhibitory activity was the main vehicle for differential modulation of motor cortical excitability by linguistic demands of the tasks. The results of this study highlight the importance of cortical inhibitory mechanisms in the physiology of higher cognitive activities. They also provide further evidence that the task specific modulation of the excitability of the motor cortex goes beyond motor complexity of the task and is also dependant on associated cognitive components.
Indexed as
Identifiers
18712373What 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.