ArticleExperimental brain research2019
Spinal reciprocal inhibition in the co-contraction of the lower leg depends on muscle activity ratio.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of Clenching Strength on Exercise Performance: Verification Using Spinal Function Assessments.Sports healthTrial
- Article
- Activation of the Supplementary Motor Areas Enhances Spinal Reciprocal Inhibition in Healthy Individuals.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Effects of repetitive passive movement on ankle joint on spinal reciprocal inhibition.Experimental brain research · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The spinal reciprocal inhibition during co-contraction remains unclear. Reports on the reciprocal Ia and D1 inhibitions in the co-contraction are lacking, and a point about the muscle activity amount during co-contraction is unclear. This study aimed to clarify the influence of changes in the ratio of soleus (Sol) and tibialis anterior (TA) muscle activities in co-contraction on reciprocal Ia and D1 inhibitions. Twenty healthy adults were subjected to four stimulatory conditions: a conditioning stimulus-test stimulation interval (CTI) of - 2, 2, or 20 ms or a test stimulus without a conditioning stimulus (single). Co-contraction [change in (Sol)/(TA) activity] was examined at task A, 0%/0% maximal voluntary contraction (MVC); task B, 5%/5% MVC; task C, 15%/15% MVC; task D, 5%/15% MVC; and task E, 15%/5% MVC. At 2-ms CTI, the H-reflex amplitude value was significantly lower in tasks A, B, C, and D than in the single condition. Among the tasks, the H-reflex amplitude values were lower for A, B, C, and D than for E. At 20-ms CTI, the H-reflex amplitude was significantly lower in tasks A, B, C, D, and E. Among the tasks, the H-reflex amplitude was significantly lower from task A and B to task E. The change in the muscle activity ratio during co-contraction could modulate reciprocal Ia inhibition depending on the Sol/TA muscle activity ratio. D1 inhibition at rest did not differ significantly when the Sol/TA ratio was equal or when TA muscle activity was high. During co-contraction with high Sol muscle activity, D1 inhibition decreased from rest.
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.