Reply to Maslovat et al.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Response triggering by an acoustic stimulus increases with stimulus intensity and is best predicted by startle reflex activation.Scientific reports · 2021
   Article
2. StartReact during gait initiation reveals differential control of muscle activation and inhibition in patients with corticospinal degeneration.Journal of neurology · 2018
   Article
3. StartReact effects in first dorsal interosseous muscle are absent in a pinch task, but present when combined with elbow flexion.PloS one · 2018
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  Responses to loud auditory stimuli indicate that movement-related activation builds up in anticipation of action.2013
• Comment on
  Responses to startling acoustic stimuli indicate that movement-related activation does not build up in anticipation of action.2015

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as