Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32760711›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2020

Reorganization of Muscle Coordination Underlying Motor Learning in Cycling Tasks.

Diego Torricelli, Cristiano De Marchis, Andrea d'Avella, Daniel Nemati Tobaruela, Filipe Oliveira Barroso, Jose L Pons

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Synergy-Dependent Center-of-Mass Control Strategies During Sit-to-Stand Movements.IEEE open journal of engineering in medicine and biology · 2025
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. 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 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Diego TorricelliNeural Rehabilitation Group, Cajal Institute, Spanish National Research Center (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.
Cristiano De MarchisBiomedical Engineering Laboratory, Department of Engineering, Università Roma TRE, Rome, Italy.
Andrea d'AvellaLaboratory of Neuromotor Physiology, IRCCS Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome, Italy.
Daniel Nemati TobaruelaNeural Rehabilitation Group, Cajal Institute, Spanish National Research Center (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.
Filipe Oliveira BarrosoNeural Rehabilitation Group, Cajal Institute, Spanish National Research Center (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.
Jose L PonsNeural Rehabilitation Group, Cajal Institute, Spanish National Research Center (CSIC), Madrid, Spain.
Instituto Cajal · ESFondazione Santa Lucia · ITMcCormick (United States) · USRoma Tre University · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The hypothesis of modular control, which stands on the existence of muscle synergies as building blocks of muscle coordination, has been investigated in a great variety of motor tasks and species. Yet, its role during learning processes is still largely unexplored. To what extent is such modular control flexible, in terms of spatial structure and temporal activation, to externally or internally induced adaptations, is a debated issue. To address this question, we designed a biofeedback experiment to induce changes in the timing of muscle activations during leg cycling movements. The protocol consisted in delaying the peak of activation of one target muscle and using its electromyography (EMG) envelope as visual biofeedback. For each of the 10 healthy participants, the protocol was repeated for three different target muscles: Tibialis Anterioris (TA), Gastrocnemius Medialis (GM), and Vastus Lateralis (VL). To explore the effects of the conditioning protocol, we analyzed changes in the activity of eight lower limb muscles by applying different models of modular motor control [i.e., fixed spatial components (FSC) and fixed temporal components (FTC)]. Our results confirm the hypothesis that visual EMG biofeedback is able to induce changes in muscle coordination. Subjects were able to shift the peak of activation of the target muscle, with a delay of (49 ± 27°) across subjects and conditions. This time shift generated a reorganization of all the other muscles in terms of timing and amplitude. By using different models of modular motor control, we demonstrated that neither spatially invariant nor temporally invariant muscle synergies alone were able to account for these changes in muscle coordination after learning, while temporally invariant muscle synergies with adjustments in timing could capture most of muscle activity adaptations observed after the conditioning protocol. These results suggest that short-term learning in rhythmic tasks is built upon synergistic temporal commands that are robust to changes in the task demands.

Indexed as

adaptationEMG biofeedbackmodular controlmuscle synergiespedaling

Identifiers

PMID32760711
PMCPMC7373728
OpenAlexW3043753785

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.