ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2012
Long-term adaptations differ for shortening and lengthening contractions.
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine whether practice of a sinusoidal task induces different neural adaptations for shortening and lengthening contractions performed within a task. Fourteen young adults were instructed to accurately match a sinusoidal target by lifting and lowering a light load (15% of 1 repetition maximum; 1-RM) with their index finger for 35 s. Each subject performed a total of 50 practice trials during the practice session. After 48 h, subjects performed five trials with the same sinusoidal target at each of three loading conditions: 15% (retention/savings), 7.5% (transfer to a lighter load), and 30% (transfer to a heavier load) of 1-RM. Movement error was quantified as the root mean square error of the movement trace from the target, while movement variability was quantified as the standard deviation of the acceleration of the index finger. First dorsal interosseus muscle activation was recorded using surface electromyography (EMG). The frequency structure of the acceleration and EMG signals were obtained using wavelets. Subjects were able to retain the trained task for both shortening and lengthening contractions; however, they exhibited better savings for the shortening contractions. Additionally, for the lowering segments of the task subjects exhibited better transfer to the lighter load. Short-term adaptation and transfer results may be related to changes in the agonist muscle neural activation. Finally, we found greater movement variability during lengthening contractions which was related to both the frequency structure of the acceleration and EMG signals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22350459What 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.