ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2018
Observing Without Acting: A Balance of Excitation and Suppression in the Human Corticospinal Pathway?
Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Relationship between transcranial magnetic stimulation markers of motor control and clinical recovery in obsessive compulsive disorder/Gilles de la Tourette syndrome: a proof of concept case study.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Pathophysiology and Treatment of Functional Paralysis: Insight from Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation.Brain sciences · 2023Review
- The recruitment of indirect waves within primary motor cortex during motor imagery: A directional transcranial magnetic stimulation study.The European journal of neuroscience · 2022Article
- Transcranial magnetic stimulation: a non-invasive window into the excitatory circuits involved in human motor behavior.Experimental brain research · 2020Review
- Muscle-specific modulation of indirect inputs to primary motor cortex during action observation.Experimental brain research · 2020Article
- Motor Recruitment during Action Observation: Effect of Interindividual Differences in Action Strategy.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2020Article
- Impaired attentional modulation of sensorimotor control and cortical excitability in schizophrenia.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2019Article
- Modulating Observation-Execution-Related Motor Cortex Activity by Cathodal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation.Brain sciences · 2019Article
- Interaction Between Transcranial Random Noise Stimulation and Observation-Execution Matching Activity Promotes Motor Cortex Excitability.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2019Article
- SICI during changing brain states: Differences in methodology can lead to different conclusions.Brain stimulationArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) studies of human primary motor cortex (M1) indicate an increase corticospinal excitability during the observation of another's action. This appears to be somewhat at odds with recordings of pyramidal tract neurons in primate M1 showing that there is a balance of increased and decreased activity across the population. TMS is known to recruit a mixed population of cortical neurons, and so one explanation for previous results is that TMS tends to recruit those excitatory output neurons whose activity is increased during action observation. Here we took advantage of the directional sensitivity of TMS to recruit different subsets of M1 neurons and probed whether they responded differentially to action observation in a manner consistent with the balanced change in activity in primates. At the group level we did not observe the expected increase in corticospinal excitability for either TMS current direction during the observation of a precision grip movement. Instead, we observed substantial inter-individual variability ranging from strong facilitation to strong suppression of corticospinal excitability that was similar across both current directions. Thus, we found no evidence of any differential changes in the excitability of distinct M1 neuronal populations during action observation. The most notable change in corticospinal excitability at the group level was a general increase, across muscles and current directions, when participants went from a baseline state outside the task to a baseline state within the actual observation task. We attribute this to arousal- or attention-related processes, which appear to have a similar effect on the different corticospinal pathways targeted by different TMS current directions. Finally, this rather non-specific increase in corticospinal excitability suggests care should be taken when selecting a "baseline" state against which to compare changes during action observation.
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.