ArticlePloS one2014
Whole-body water flow stimulation to the lower limbs modulates excitability of primary motor cortical regions innervating the hands: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study.
Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- No effect of whole-hand water flow stimulation on skill acquisition and retention during sensorimotor adaptation.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Energetic responses of head-out water immersion at different temperatures during post-exercise recovery and its consequence on anaerobic mechanical power.European journal of applied physiology · 2023Article
- Priming Effects of Water Immersion on Paired Associative Stimulation-Induced Neural Plasticity in the Primary Motor Cortex.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Whole-body water immersion (WI) has been reported to change sensorimotor integration. However, primary motor cortical excitability is not affected by low-intensity afferent input. Here we explored the effects of whole-body WI and water flow stimulation (WF) on corticospinal excitability and intracortical circuits. Eight healthy subjects participated in this study. We measured the amplitude of motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) produced by single transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) pulses and examined conditioned MEP amplitudes by paired-pulse TMS. We evaluated short-interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and intracortical facilitation (ICF) using the paired-TMS technique before and after 15-min intervention periods. Two interventions used were whole-body WI with water flow to the lower limbs (whole-body WF) and whole-body WI without water flow to the lower limbs (whole-body WI). The experimental sequence included a baseline TMS assessment (T0), intervention for 15 min, a second TMS assessment immediately after intervention (T1), a 10 min resting period, a third TMS assessment (T2), a 10 min resting period, a fourth TMS assessment (T3), a 10 min resting period, and the final TMS assessment (T4). SICI and ICF were evaluated using a conditioning stimulus of 90% active motor threshold and a test stimulus adjusted to produce MEPs of approximately 1-1.2 mV, and were tested at intrastimulus intervals of 3 and 10 ms, respectively. Whole-body WF significantly increased MEP amplitude by single-pulse TMS and led to a decrease in SICI in the contralateral motor cortex at T1, T2 and T3. Whole-body WF also induced increased corticospinal excitability and decreased SICI. In contrast, whole-body WI did not change corticospinal excitability or intracortical circuits.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.