ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2019
Task-dependent responses to muscle vibration during reaching.
Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Proprioceptive integration in motor control.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Proprioceptive and Visual Feedback Responses in Macaques Exploit Goal Redundancy.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2023Article
- Tapping on a target: dealing with uncertainty about its position and motion.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Integration of proprioceptive and visual feedback during online control of reaching.Journal of neurophysiology · 2022Article
- Somatosensory deafferentation reveals lateralized roles of proprioception in feedback and adaptive feedforward control of movement and posture.Current opinion in physiology · 2021Article
- Task-dependent responses to muscle vibration during reaching.The European journal of neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Feedback corrections in reaching have been shown to be task-dependent for proprioceptive, visual and vestibular perturbations, in line with predictions from optimal feedback control theory. Mechanical perturbations have been used to elicit proprioceptive errors, but have the drawback to actively alter the limb's trajectory, making it nontrivial to dissociate the subject's compensatory response from the perturbation itself. In contrast, muscle vibration provides an alternative tool to perturb the muscle afferents without changing the hands trajectory, inducing only changes in the estimated, but not the actual, limb position and velocity. Here, we investigate whether upper-arm muscle vibration is sufficient to evoke task-dependent feedback corrections during goal-directed reaching to a narrow versus a wide target. Our main result is that for vibration of biceps and triceps, compensatory responses were down-regulated for the wide compared to the narrow target. The earliest detectable difference between these target-specific corrections is at about 100 ms, likely reflecting a task-dependent feedback control policy rather than a voluntary response.
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.