Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24655366›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2014

Resting and active motor thresholds versus stimulus-response curves to determine transcranial magnetic stimulation intensity in quadriceps femoris.

John Temesi, Mathieu Gruet, Thomas Rupp, Samuel Verges, Guillaume Y Millet

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 99 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Sex differences in corticospinal excitability and quadriceps performance after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

John Temesi
Mathieu Gruet
Thomas Rupp
Samuel Verges
Guillaume Y MilletLaboratoire de Physiologie de l'Exercice, Université de Lyon, Saint-Etienne F-42023, France. gmillet@ucalgary.ca.
Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRInserm · FRLaboratoire Motricité Humaine Éducation Sport Santé · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTranscranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a widely-used investigative technique in motor cortical evaluation. Recently, there has been a surge in TMS studies evaluating lower-limb fatigue. TMS intensity of 120-130% resting motor threshold (RMT) and 120% active motor threshold (AMT) and TMS intensity determined using stimulus-response curves during muscular contraction have been used in these studies. With the expansion of fatigue research in locomotion, the quadriceps femoris is increasingly of interest. It is important to select a stimulus intensity appropriate to evaluate the variables, including voluntary activation, being measured in this functionally important muscle group. This study assessed whether selected quadriceps TMS stimulus intensity determined by frequently employed methods is similar between methods and muscles.

methodsStimulus intensity in vastus lateralis, rectus femoris and vastus medialis muscles was determined by RMT, AMT (i.e. during brief voluntary contractions at 10% maximal voluntary force, MVC) and maximal motor-evoked potential (MEP) amplitude from stimulus-response curves during brief voluntary contractions at 10, 20 and 50% MVC at different stimulus intensities.

resultsStimulus intensity determined from a 10% MVC stimulus-response curve and at 120 and 130% RMT was higher than stimulus intensity at 120% AMT (lowest) and from a 50% MVC stimulus-response curve (p < 0.05). Stimulus intensity from a 20% MVC stimulus-response curve was similar to 120% RMT and 50% MVC stimulus-response curve. Mean stimulus intensity for stimulus-response curves at 10, 20 and 50% MVC corresponded to approximately 135, 115 and 100% RMT and 180, 155 and 130% AMT, respectively. Selected stimulus intensity was similar between muscles for all methods (p > 0.05).

conclusionsSimilar optimal stimulus intensity and maximal MEP amplitudes at 20 and 50% MVC and the minimal risk of residual fatigue at 20% MVC suggest that a 20% MVC stimulus-response curve is appropriate for determining TMS stimulus intensity in the quadriceps femoris. The higher selected stimulus intensities at 120-130% RMT have the potential to cause increased coactivation and discomfort and the lower stimulus intensity at 120% AMT may underestimate evoked responses. One muscle may also act as a surrogate in determining optimal quadriceps femoris stimulation intensity.

Indexed as

AdultElectromyographyEvoked Potentials, MotorHumansMaleMotor CortexMuscle ContractionQuadriceps MuscleTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation

Identifiers

PMID24655366
PMCPMC3976163
OpenAlexW2136301140

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.