Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19008488›Full record

ArticleJournal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985)2009

Chronic low-frequency rTMS of primary motor cortex diminishes exercise training-induced gains in maximal voluntary force in humans.

Tibor Hortobágyi, Sarah Pirio Richardson, Mikhael Lomarev, Ejaz Shamim, Sabine Meunier, Heike Russman, Nguyet Dang, Mark Hallett

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985), 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Tracking the corticospinal responses to strength training.European journal of applied physiology · 2020
    Trial
  5. Interhemispheric plasticity in humans.Medicine and science in sports and exercise · 2011
    Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Neural adaptations to electrical stimulation strength training.European journal of applied physiology · 2011
    Review
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

8 authors.

Tibor HortobágyiDeptartment of Exercise and Sport Science, East Carolina Univ., Greenville, NC 27858 USA. hortobagyit@ecu.edu
Sarah Pirio Richardson
Mikhael Lomarev
Ejaz Shamim
Sabine Meunier
Heike Russman
Nguyet Dang
Mark Hallett

Funding

Physiology of Voluntary MovementZIANS002669 · NINDS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI HALLETT, MARK · 2009 to 2023
$15.4M
Physiology of Voluntary MovementZ01NS002669 · NINDS · NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS AND STROKE · PI HALLETT, MARK A · 1985 to 2008
$2.7M
Interhemispheric plasticity in humansF33NS049783 · NINDS · U.S. NATIONAL INST/NEURO/DS/STROKE · PI HORTOBAGYI, TIBOR · 2005 to 2005
$56k
NINDS NIH HHS NS-049783
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although there is consensus that the central nervous system mediates the increases in maximal voluntary force (maximal voluntary contraction, MVC) produced by resistance exercise, the involvement of the primary motor cortex (M1) in these processes remains controversial. We hypothesized that 1-Hz repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) of M1 during resistance training would diminish strength gains. Forty subjects were divided equally into five groups. Subjects voluntarily (Vol) abducted the first dorsal interosseus (FDI) (5 bouts x 10 repetitions, 10 sessions, 4 wk) at 70-80% MVC. Another group also exercised but in the 1-min-long interbout rest intervals they received rTMS [Vol+rTMS, 1 Hz, FDI motor area, 300 pulses/session, 120% of the resting motor threshold (rMT)]. The third group also exercised and received sham rTMS (Vol+Sham). The fourth group received only rTMS (rTMS_only). The 37.5% and 33.3% gains in MVC in Vol and Vol+Sham groups, respectively, were greater (P = 0.001) than the 18.9% gain in Vol+rTMS, 1.9% in rTMS_only, and 2.6% in unexercised control subjects who received no stimulation. Acutely, within sessions 5 and 10, single-pulse TMS revealed that motor-evoked potential size and recruitment curve slopes were reduced in Vol+rTMS and rTMS_only groups and accumulated to chronic reductions by session 10. There were no changes in rMT, maximum compound action potential amplitude (M(max)), and peripherally evoked twitch forces in the trained FDI and the untrained abductor digiti minimi. Although contributions from spinal sources cannot be excluded, the data suggest that M1 may play a role in mediating neural adaptations to strength training.

Indexed as

Muscle ContractionMuscle StrengthResistance TrainingTranscranial Magnetic StimulationAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdultEvoked Potentials, MotorFemaleHumansMaleMotor CortexMuscle, SkeletalRecruitment, Neurophysiological

Identifiers

PMID19008488
PMCPMC2644240

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.