Trial reportSpinal cord2019
The effect of paired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation on maximal voluntary elbow flexion in cervical spinal cord injury: an experimental study.
Trial report in Spinal cord, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corticospinal-motor neuronal plasticity promotes exercise-mediated recovery in humans with spinal cord injury.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2020Trial
- Hebbian priming of human motor learning.Nature communications · 2024Article
- The effect of high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation on motor recovery and gait parameters in chronic incomplete spinal cord injury: A randomized-controlled study.Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2023Article
- Electrode Size and Placement for Surface EMG Bipolar Detection from the Brachioradialis Muscle: A Scoping Review.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Paired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation and exercise after spinal cord injury.The journal of spinal cord medicine · 2021Review
- Acute intermittent hypoxia boosts spinal plasticity in humans with tetraplegia.Experimental neurology · 2021Article
- The Potential of Corticospinal-Motoneuronal Plasticity for Recovery after Spinal Cord Injury.Current physical medicine and rehabilitation reports · 2020Article
- Motor Point Stimulation in Spinal Paired Associative Stimulation can Facilitate Spinal Cord Excitability.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2020Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designRandomised, controlled, crossover study.
objectivesPaired corticospinal-motoneuronal stimulation (PCMS) involves repeatedly pairing stimuli to corticospinal neurones and motoneurones to induce changes in corticospinal transmission. Here, we examined whether PCMS could enhance maximal voluntary elbow flexion in people with cervical spinal cord injury.
settingNeuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, Australia.
methodsPCMS comprised 100 pairs of transcranial magnetic and electrical peripheral nerve stimulation (0.1 Hz), timed so corticospinal potentials arrived at corticospinal-motoneuronal synapses 1.5 ms before antidromic motoneuronal potentials. On two separate days, sets of five maximal elbow flexions were performed by 11 individuals with weak elbow flexors post C4 or C5 spinal cord injury before and after PCMS or control (100 peripheral nerve stimuli) conditioning. During contractions, supramaximal biceps brachii stimulation elicited superimposed twitches, which were expressed as a proportion of resting twitches to give maximal voluntary activation. Maximal torque and electromyographic activity were also assessed.
resultsBaseline median (range) maximal torque was 11 Nm (6-41 Nm) and voluntary activation was 92% (62-99%). Linear mixed modelling revealed no significant differences between PCMS and control protocols after conditioning (maximal torque: p = 0.87, superimposed twitch: p = 0.87, resting twitch: p = 0.44, voluntary activation: p = 0.36, biceps EMG: p = 0.25, brachioradialis EMG: 0.67).
conclusionsPossible explanations for the lack of effect include a potential ceiling effect for voluntary activation, or that PCMS may be less effective for elbow flexors than distal muscles. Despite results, previous studies suggest that PCMS is worthy of further investigation.
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.