Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26811055›Full record

Trial reportPhysiological reports2016

Changes in corticospinal drive to spinal motoneurones following tablet-based practice of manual dexterity.

Lisbeth H Larsen, Thor Jensen, Mark S Christensen, Jesper Lundbye-Jensen, Henning Langberg, Jens B Nielsen

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Physiological reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Corticomuscular coupling study for post-stroke rehabilitation: a scoping review.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. How plastic are human spinal cord motor circuitries?Experimental brain research · 2017
    Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Lisbeth H LarsenCopenRehab, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen K, Denmark Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark Department of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark lihl@sund.ku.dk.
Thor JensenDepartment of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark Department of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
Mark S ChristensenDepartment of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
Jesper Lundbye-JensenDepartment of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark Department of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
Henning LangbergCopenRehab, Department of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen K, Denmark.
Jens B NielsenDepartment of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark Department of Neuroscience and Pharmacology, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen N, Denmark.
University of Copenhagen · DKUniversity College Copenhagen · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of touch screens, which require a high level of manual dexterity, has exploded since the development of smartphone and tablet technology. Manual dexterity relies on effective corticospinal control of finger muscles, and we therefore hypothesized that corticospinal drive to finger muscles can be optimized by tablet-based motor practice. To investigate this, sixteen able-bodied females practiced a tablet-based game (3 × 10 min) with their nondominant hand requiring incrementally fast and precise pinching movements involving the thumb and index fingers. The study was designed as a semirandomized crossover study where the participants attended one practice- and one control session. Before and after each session electrophysiological recordings were obtained during three blocks of 50 precision pinch movements in a standardized setup resembling the practiced task. Data recorded during movements included electroencephalographic (EEG) activity from primary motor cortex and electromyographic (EMG) activity from first dorsal interosseous (FDI) and abductor pollicis brevis (APB) muscles. Changes in the corticospinal drive were evaluated from coupling in the frequency domain (coherence) between EEG-EMG and EMG-EMG activity. Following motor practice performance improved significantly and a significant increase in EEG-EMGAPB and EMGAPB-EMGFDI coherence in the beta band (15-30 Hz) was observed. No changes were observed after the control session. Our results show that tablet-based motor practice is associated with changes in the common corticospinal drive to spinal motoneurons involved in manual dexterity. Tablet-based motor practice may be a motivating training tool for stroke patients who struggle with loss of dexterity.

Indexed as

Computers, HandheldCross-Over StudiesElectroencephalographyElectromyographyFemaleFingersHumansMotor CortexMotor NeuronsMotor SkillsPyramidal TractsYoung Adultcoherencecorticomuscularmanual dexterityplasticityTablet‐based practice

Identifiers

PMID26811055
PMCPMC4760389
OpenAlexW2261191298

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.