Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30771058›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of applied physiology2019

Motor unit action potential amplitudes and firing rates during repetitive muscle actions of the first dorsal interosseous in children and adults.

Jonathan D Miller, Adam J Sterczala, Michael A Trevino, Mandy E Wray, Hannah L Dimmick, Trent J Herda

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of applied physiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. A question of rate? Girl-women differences in motor unit firing rate.European journal of applied physiology · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jonathan D MillerNeuromechanics Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, 1301 Sunnyside Ave, Room 101BE, Lawrence, KS, 66045, USA.
Adam J SterczalaNeuromechanics Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, 1301 Sunnyside Ave, Room 101BE, Lawrence, KS, 66045, USA.
Michael A TrevinoApplied Neuromuscular Physiology Laboratory, School of Kinesiology, Applied Health, and Recreation, Oklahoma State University, 101 Colvin Center, Stillwater, OK, 74078, USA.
Mandy E WrayNeuromechanics Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, 1301 Sunnyside Ave, Room 101BE, Lawrence, KS, 66045, USA.
Hannah L DimmickNeuromechanics Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, 1301 Sunnyside Ave, Room 101BE, Lawrence, KS, 66045, USA.
Trent J HerdaNeuromechanics Laboratory, Department of Health, Sport, and Exercise Sciences, University of Kansas, 1301 Sunnyside Ave, Room 101BE, Lawrence, KS, 66045, USA. t.herda@ku.edu.
University of Kansas · USOklahoma State University · US

Funding

National Strength and Conditioning Association Foundation #0000010446University of Kansas GRF 2301166-RSC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePrevious research has indicated greater muscle activation is needed for children (CH) to match relative intensity submaximal contractions in comparison with adults (AD). However, no study has compared motor unit (MU) firing and recruitment patterns between children and adults. Therefore, MU action potential amplitudes (MUAP

methodsTwenty-two children (age 9.0 ± 0.8 years) and 13 adults (age 22.9 ± 4.8 years) completed three maximum voluntary contractions (MVC) and two repetitive isometric contractions at 30% MVC for 40 s. Surface electromyography (EMG) was recorded and decomposed into action potential trains. MUAP

resultsN-EMG (P = 0.001, CH = 56.5 ± 31.7%, AD = 30.3 ± 9.1%), MFRs regardless of RT, according to greater y-intercepts of the MFR vs. RT relationships [P = 0.013, CH = 31.1 ± 5.1 pulses per second (pps), AD = 25.9 ± 4.3 pps] and MFRs of MUs with smaller action potential amplitudes (P = 0.017, CH = 29.4 ± 6.8 pps, AD = 23.5 ± 3.5 pps), were greater for children. MUAP

conclusionsMuscle activation and MU firing rates were greater for children, which likely indicated a greater operating point of MU control in comparison with adults during an isometric contraction performed at a relative submaximal intensity.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsAdolescentAdultChildFemaleHumansIsometric ContractionMaleMotor NeuronsMuscle FatigueMuscle, SkeletalRecruitment, NeurophysiologicalYoung AdultChildrenElectromyographyMotor unitsMuscle activationUltrasound

Identifiers

PMID30771058
OpenAlexW2914206194

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.