ArticlePloS one2019
Improving the measurement of TMS-assessed voluntary activation in the knee extensors.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Effect of Phase Change Material on Recovery of Neuromuscular Function Following Competitive Soccer Match-Play.Frontiers in physiology · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo test the accuracy, validity, reliability and sensitivity of an alternative method for the measure of TMS-assessed voluntary activation (VATMS) in the knee extensors.
methodsTen healthy males (24 ± 5 years) completed a neuromuscular assessment protocol before and after a fatiguing isometric exercise: two sets of five contractions (50%, 62.5%, 75%, 87.5%, 100% Maximal Voluntary Contraction; MVC) with superimposed TMS-evoked twitches for calculation of VATMS using either the first 5 stimulations (1x5C) or all 10 (2x5C). This was performed on two separate occasions (between-day reliability). Accuracy and validity were compared with a routinely used protocol [i.e. 50%, 75%, and 100% of MVC (1x3C) performed three times (3x3C)].
results95% confidence interval for estimated resting twitch, a key determinant of VATMS, was similar between 1x5C, 2x5C, and 3x3C but improved by six-fold when compared to 1x3C (P<0.05). In a fresh state, potentiated twitch force was unchanged following 1x5C but decreased following 2x5C (P<0.05). A recovery was found post-exercise but was smaller for 1x5C compared to 2x5C (P<0.05), with no difference between the latter two (P>0.05). Absolute reliability was strong enough for both 1x5C and 2x5C to depict a true detectable change in the sample's VATMS following the fatiguing exercise (TEM < 3% at rest, <9% post-exercise) but 2x5C was marginally more sensitive to individual's changes from baseline.
conclusionBoth 1x5C and 2x5C provide reliable measures of VATMS. However, 1x5C may hold stronger internal validity. Both protocols allow detection of 'true' changes in sample's means but not individual scores following a fatiguing isometric exercise.
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.