Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30864866›Full record

ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2019

High-intensity transcranial magnetic stimulation reveals differential cortical contributions to prepared responses.

Victoria Smith, Dana Maslovat, Neil M Drummond, Joëlle Hajj, Alexandra Leguerrier, Anthony N Carlsen

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 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. What Is the StartReact Effect?Acta physiologica (Oxford, England) · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

Victoria SmithSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario , Canada.
Dana MaslovatSchool of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia , Vancouver, British Columbia , Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4383-6046
Neil M DrummondSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario , Canada.
Joëlle HajjSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario , Canada.
Alexandra LeguerrierSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario , Canada.
Anthony N CarlsenSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa , Ottawa, Ontario , Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-6015-8991
University of Ottawa · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Corticospinal output pathways have typically been considered to be the primary driver for voluntary movements of the hand/forearm; however, more recently, reticulospinal drive has also been implicated in the production of these movements. Although both pathways may play a role, the reticulospinal tract is thought to have stronger connections to flexor muscles than to extensors. Similarly, movements involuntarily triggered via a startling acoustic stimulus (SAS) are believed to receive greater reticular input than voluntary movements. To investigate a differential role of reticulospinal drive depending on movement type or acoustic stimulus, corticospinal drive was transiently interrupted using high-intensity transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) applied during the reaction time (RT) interval. This TMS-induced suppression of cortical drive leads to RT delays that can be used to assess cortical contributions to movement. Participants completed targeted flexion and extension movements of the wrist in a simple RT paradigm in response to a control auditory go signal or SAS. Occasionally, suprathreshold TMS was applied over the motor cortical representation for the prime mover. Results revealed that TMS significantly increased RT in all conditions. There was a significantly longer TMS-induced RT delay seen in extension movements than in flexion movements and a greater RT delay in movements initiated in response to control stimuli compared with SAS. These results suggest that the contribution of reticulospinal drive is larger for wrist flexion than for extension. Similarly, movements triggered involuntarily by an SAS appear to involve greater reticulospinal drive, and relatively less corticospinal drive, than those that are voluntarily initiated.

Indexed as

Reflex, StartleAcoustic StimulationFemaleHumansMaleMovementPyramidal TractsReaction TimeSomatosensory CortexTranscranial Magnetic StimulationYoung Adultcortical drivereticulospinal tractstartletranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID30864866
PMCPMC6589715
OpenAlexW2921605530

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.