Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24944216›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2014

Operant conditioning of the soleus H-reflex does not induce long-term changes in the gastrocnemius H-reflexes and does not disturb normal locomotion in humans.

Yukiko Makihara, Richard L Segal, Jonathan R Wolpaw, Aiko K Thompson

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03461159 (Operant Conditioning of Spinal Reflexes and Motor Evoked Potentials), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 25% 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.

NCT03461159 naunknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2018, after this paper: background citation

Operant Conditioning of Spinal Reflexes and Motor Evoked Potentials

TypeinterventionalSponsorStacey DejongRan2018 to 2024Enrolled60ConditionsStroke, HealthyArmsOperant conditioning of H-reflexes, Operant conditioning of motor evoked potentials
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  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

4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yukiko MakiharaHelen Hayes Hospital, New York State Department of Health, West Haverstraw, New York; Program in Human Movement Science, Department of Allied Health Sciences, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina;
Richard L SegalProgram in Human Movement Science, Department of Allied Health Sciences, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Department of Health Professions, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina;
Jonathan R WolpawHelen Hayes Hospital, New York State Department of Health, West Haverstraw, New York; Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York; Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York; and Department of Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York, Albany, New York.
Aiko K ThompsonHelen Hayes Hospital, New York State Department of Health, West Haverstraw, New York; Wadsworth Center, New York State Department of Health, Albany, New York; Department of Neurology, Neurological Institute, Columbia University, New York, New York; and Department of Biomedical Sciences, State University of New York, Albany, New York a.kido.thompson@gmail.com.
Columbia University · USHelen Hayes Hospital · USNew York State Department of Health · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Training and DisseminationP41EB018783 · NIBIB · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI Jonathan Saul Carp · 2014 to 2026
$15.4M
GENERAL PURPOSE BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE(BCI)SYSTEMR01EB000856 · NIBIB · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI SCHALK, GERWIN, WOLPAW, JONATHAN RICKEL · 2002 to 2012
$9.3M
ADAPTIVE PLASTICITY IN THE SPINAL STRETCH REFLEXR01NS022189 · NINDS · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI WOLPAW, JONATHAN RICKEL · 1985 to 2012
$3.1M
Changing a Reflex to Improve LocomotionR01NS069551 · NINDS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI THOMPSON, AIKO · 2010 to 2014
$1.4M
Spinal Reflex Conditioning and LocomotionR01NS061823 · NINDS · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI CHEN, XIANG YANG, WOLPAW, JONATHAN RICKEL · 2008 to 2011
$1.3M
NIBIB NIH HHS P41 EB018783NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000856NINDS NIH HHS NS061823NINDS NIH HHS NS069551NINDS NIH HHS NS22189
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In normal animals, operant conditioning of the spinal stretch reflex or the H-reflex has lesser effects on synergist muscle reflexes. In rats and people with incomplete spinal cord injury (SCI), soleus H-reflex operant conditioning can improve locomotion. We studied in normal humans the impact of soleus H-reflex down-conditioning on medial (MG) and lateral gastrocnemius (LG) H-reflexes and on locomotion. Subjects completed 6 baseline and 30 conditioning sessions. During conditioning trials, the subject was encouraged to decrease soleus H-reflex size with the aid of visual feedback. Every sixth session, MG and LG H-reflexes were measured. Locomotion was assessed before and after conditioning. In successfully conditioned subjects, the soleus H-reflex decreased 27.2%. This was the sum of within-session (task dependent) adaptation (13.2%) and across-session (long term) change (14%). The MG H-reflex decreased 14.5%, due mainly to task-dependent adaptation (13.4%). The LG H-reflex showed no task-dependent adaptation or long-term change. No consistent changes were detected across subjects in locomotor H-reflexes, EMG activity, joint angles, or step symmetry. Thus, in normal humans, soleus H-reflex down-conditioning does not induce long-term changes in MG/LG H-reflexes and does not change locomotion. In these subjects, task-dependent adaptation of the soleus H-reflex is greater than it is in people with SCI, whereas long-term change is less. This difference from results in people with SCI is consistent with the fact that long-term change is beneficial in people with SCI, since it improves locomotion. In contrast, in normal subjects, long-term change is not beneficial and may necessitate compensatory plasticity to preserve satisfactory locomotion.

Indexed as

Conditioning, OperantH-ReflexLocomotionAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMuscle, SkeletalTime Factorslearningplasticityrehabilitationspinal cordsynergists

Identifiers

PMID24944216
PMCPMC4137250
OpenAlexW2330780270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.