Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28455814›Full record

Trial reportEuropean journal of applied physiology2017

Adaptations in corticospinal excitability and inhibition are not spatially confined to the agonist muscle following strength training.

Joel Mason, Ashlyn Frazer, Deanna M Horvath, Alan J Pearce, Janne Avela, Glyn Howatson, Dawson Kidgell

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in European journal of applied physiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Tracking the corticospinal responses to strength training.European journal of applied physiology · 2020
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Does the reticulospinal tract mediate adaptation to resistance training in humans?Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985) · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

7 authors.

Joel MasonDiscipline of Exercise Science, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Ashlyn FrazerDiscipline of Exercise Science, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Deanna M HorvathDepartment of Physiology, Anatomy and Microbiology, School of Life Sciences, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Alan J PearceDiscipline of Exercise Science, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia.
Janne AvelaDepartment of Biology and Physical Activity, University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Glyn HowatsonDepartment of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation, Northumbria University, Newcastle, UK.
Dawson KidgellDiscipline of Exercise Science, School of Allied Health, La Trobe University, Melbourne, Australia. D.Kidgell@latrobe.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe used transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to determine the corticospinal responses from an agonist and synergist muscle following strength training of the right elbow flexors.

methodsMotor-evoked potentials were recorded from the biceps brachii and flexor carpi radialis during a submaximal contraction from 20 individuals (10 women, 10 men, aged 18-35 years; training group; n = 10 and control group; n = 10) before and after 3 weeks of strength training at 80% of 1-repetition maximum (1-RM). To characterise the input-output properties of the corticospinal tract, stimulus-response curves for corticospinal excitability and inhibition of the right biceps brachii and flexor carpi radialis were constructed and assessed by examining the area under the recruitment curve (AURC).

resultsStrength training resulted in a 29% (P < 0.001) increase in 1-RM biceps brachii strength and this was accompanied by a 19% increase in isometric strength of the wrist flexors (P = 0.001). TMS revealed an increase in corticospinal excitability AURC and a decrease in silent period duration AURC for the biceps brachii and flexor carpi radialis following strength training (all P < 0.05). However, the changes in corticospinal function were not associated with increased muscle strength.

conclusionThese findings show that the corticospinal responses to strength training of a proximal upper limb muscle are not spatially restricted, but rather, results in a change in connectivity, among an agonist and a synergistic muscle relevant to force production.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalEvoked Potentials, MotorExerciseNeural InhibitionAdolescentAdultElbowFemaleHumansMaleMuscle, SkeletalPyramidal TractsAgonistCorticospinal excitabilityCorticospinal inhibitionStrength trainingSynergistVoluntary strength

Identifiers

PMID28455814

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.