ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2018
Short vs. long pulses for testing knee extensor neuromuscular properties: does it matter?
Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Excitability of posterior root reflex evoked by transcutaneous spinal stimulation is distinct from the H-reflex in the soleus muscle: a pulse duration study.Journal of neurophysiology · 2026Article
- Reliability of M-wave amplitude measurement from paired stimulations across different muscle groups before and after submaximal contraction to failure.European journal of applied physiology · 2026Article
- Effects of electrode size and placement on comfort and efficiency during low-intensity neuromuscular electrical stimulation of quadriceps, hamstrings and gluteal muscles.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2022Article
- Peripheral Alterations Affect the Loss in Force after a Treadmill Downhill Run.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Quantification of Neuromuscular Fatigue: What Do We Do Wrong and Why?Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe present study aimed at comparing knee extensor neuromuscular properties determined with transcutaneous electrical stimulation using two pulse durations before and after a standardized fatigue protocol.
methodsIn the first sub-study, 19 healthy participants (ten women and nine men; 28 ± 5 years) took part to two separate testing sessions involving the characterization of voluntary activation (twitch interpolation technique), muscle contractility (evoked forces by single and paired stimuli), and neuromuscular propagation (M-wave amplitude from vastus lateralis and vastus medialis muscles) obtained at supramaximal intensity with a pulse duration of either 0.2 or 1 ms. The procedures were identical in the second sub-study (N = 11), except that neuromuscular properties were also evaluated after a standardized fatiguing exercise. Electrical stimulation was delivered through large surface electrodes positioned over the quadriceps muscle and a visual analog scale was used to evaluate the discomfort to paired stimuli evoked at rest.
resultsThere was no difference between pulse durations in the estimates of voluntary activation, neuromuscular propagation, and muscle contractility both in the non-fatigued and fatigued states. The discomfort associated with supramaximal paired electrical stimuli was also comparable between the two pulse durations.
conclusionsIt appears that 0.2- and 1-ms-long pulses provide a comparable evaluation of knee extensor neuromuscular properties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29218407What 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.