ArticleJournal of sports science & medicine2011
Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation (15 Hz RPMS) of the Human Soleus Muscle did not Affect Spinal Excitability.
Article in Journal of sports science & medicine, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative efficacy of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in upper trapezius myofascial pain syndrome.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2026Trial
- Effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation on poststroke ankle spasticity: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.Turkish journal of medical sciences · 2026Trial
- Temporal Modulation of Corticospinal Excitability by Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation in Healthy Young Adults.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Modulatory effects of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation on the soleus H-reflex: comparison between peripheral nerve and motor point stimulation.Journal of physical therapy science · 2026Article
- Effect of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation of the common fibular nerve on the soleus muscle Hoffmann reflex.Journal of physical therapy science · 2024Article
- Sensory Stimulation of the Triceps Surae Muscle Complex Modulates Spinal Reflex Responses-A Comparison between Tapotement Massage and Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation (rPMS).Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Controversies and Clinical Applications of Non-Invasive Transspinal Magnetic Stimulation: A Critical Review and Exploratory Trial in Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Body representation underlies response of proprioceptive acuity to repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Article
- Repetitive Peripheral Magnetic Nerve Stimulation (rPMS) as Adjuvant Therapy Reduces Skeletal Muscle Reflex Activity.Frontiers in neurology · 2019Article
- Influence of peripheral magnetic stimulation of soleus muscle on H and M waves.Journal of physical therapy science · 2018Article
- Modulation of sensorimotor cortex by repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The electric field induced by repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (RPMS) is able to activate muscles artificially due to the stimulation of deep intramuscular motor axons. RPMS applied to the muscle induces proprioceptive input to the central nervous system in different ways. Firstly, the indirect activation of mechanoreceptors and secondly, direct activation of afferent nerve fibers. The purpose of the study was to examine the effects of RPMS applied to the soleus. Thirteen male subjects received RPMS once and were investigated before and after the treatment regarding the parameters maximal M wave (Mmax), maximal H-reflex (Hmax), Hmax/Mmax-ratio, Hmax and Mmax onset latencies and plantar flexor peak twitch torque associated with Hmax (PTH). Eleven male subjects served as controls. No significant changes were observed for Hmax and PTH of the treatment group but the Hmax/Mmax-ratio increased significantly (p = 0.015) on account of a significantly decreased Mmax (p = 0.027). Hmax onset latencies were increased for the treatment group (p = 0.003) as well as for the control group (p = 0.011) while Mmax onset latencies did not change. It is concluded that the RPMS protocol did not affect spinal excitability but acted on the muscle fibres which are part of fast twitch units and mainly responsible for the generation of the maximal M wave. RPMS probably modified the integrity of neuromuscular propagation. Key pointsRPMS probably did not affect spinal excitability.Data suggested that RPMS likely acted on the muscle fibres which are part of fast twitch units and mainly responsible for the generation of the maximal M wave.RPMS probably modified the integrity of neuromuscular propagation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24149293PMC3737913What 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.