Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30673355›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2019

Changes in motor-evoked potential latency during grasping after tetraplegia.

Hang Jin Jo, Monica A Perez

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Online Movements Reflect Ongoing Deliberation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  3. Transcranial magnetic stimulation of the brain: What is stimulated? - A consensus and critical position paper.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2022
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. I-waves in motor cortex revisited.Experimental brain research · 2020
    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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Hang Jin JoUniversity of Miami, Department of Neurological Surgery, The Miami Project to Cure Paralysis, Miami, Florida.
Monica A PerezUniversity of Miami, Department of Neurological Surgery, The Miami Project to Cure Paralysis, Miami, Florida.
Neurological Surgery · US

Funding

Corticospinal Function after Spinal Cord InjuryR01NS090622 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI PEREZ, MONICA A · 2014 to 2018
$1.6M
Enhancement of hand motor function after cervical spinal cord injuryI01RX000815 · VA · VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION · PI PEREZ, MONICA A · 2015 to 2018
–
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS090622RRD VA I01 RX000815RRD VA I01 RX002474
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The corticospinal pathway contributes to the control of grasping in intact humans. After spinal cord injury (SCI), there is an extensive reorganization in the corticospinal pathway; however, its contribution to the control of grasping after the injury remains poorly understood. We addressed this question by using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) over the hand representation of the motor cortex to elicit motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) in an intrinsic finger muscle during precision grip and power grip with the TMS coil oriented to induce currents in the brain in the latero-medial (LM) direction to activate corticospinal axons directly and in the posterior-anterior (PA) and anterior-posterior (AP) directions to activate the axon indirectly through synaptic inputs in humans with and without cervical incomplete SCI. We found prolonged MEP latencies in all coil orientations in both tasks in SCI compared with control subjects. The latencies of MEPs elicited by AP relative to LM stimuli were consistently longer during power compared with precision grip in controls and SCI subjects. In contrast, PA relative to LM MEP latencies were similar between tasks across groups. Central conduction time of AP MEPs was prolonged during power compared with precision grip in controls and SCI participants. Our results support evidence indicating that inputs activated by AP and PA currents are engaged to a different extent during fine and gross grasping in humans with and without SCI.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, MotorAdultFemaleHandHand StrengthHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor ActivityMotor CortexMuscle, SkeletalNeuronal PlasticityPyramidal TractsQuadriplegiaTranscranial Magnetic Stimulationcorticospinal volleyshandI wavesmotor outputprimary motor cortextranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID30673355
PMCPMC6843103
OpenAlexW2913934337

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.