Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33652677›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2021

Characterization of Motor-Evoked Responses Obtained with Transcutaneous Electrical Spinal Stimulation from the Lower-Limb Muscles after Stroke.

Yaejin Moon, Taylor Zuleger, Martina Lamberti, Ashir Bansal, Chaithanya K Mummidisetty, Kelly A McKenzie, Lindsey Yingling, Sangeetha Madhavan, Elliot J Roth, Richard L Lieber and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Spinal Cord Stimulation for Poststroke Hemiparesis: A Scoping Review.The American journal of occupational therapy : official publication of the American Occupational Therapy Association · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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

11 authors.

Yaejin MoonShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Taylor ZulegerDepartment of Neuroscience, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45221, USA.
Martina LambertiClinical Neurophysiology, University of Twente, 7522 NH Enschede, The Netherlands.
Ashir BansalFeinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Chaithanya K MummidisettyShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Kelly A McKenzieShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3520-5762
Lindsey YinglingShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Sangeetha MadhavanDepartment of Physical Therapy, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6086-0027
Elliot J RothShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
Richard L LieberShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7203-4520
Arun JayaramanShirley Ryan AbilityLab, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.

Funding

Frankel Family Foundation NA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

An increasing number of studies suggests that a novel neuromodulation technique targeting the spinal circuitry enhances gait rehabilitation, but research on its application to stroke survivors is limited. Therefore, we investigated the characteristics of spinal motor-evoked responses (sMERs) from lower-limb muscles obtained by transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) after stroke compared to age-matched and younger controls without stroke. Thirty participants (ten stroke survivors, ten age-matched controls, and ten younger controls) completed the study. By using tSCS applied between the L1 and L2 vertebral levels, we compared sMER characteristics (resting motor threshold (RMT), slope of the recruitment curve, and latency) of the tibialis anterior (TA) and medial gastrocnemius (MG) muscles among groups. A single pulse of stimulation was delivered in 5 mA increments, increasing from 5 mA to 250 mA or until the subjects reached their maximum tolerance. The stroke group had an increased RMT (27-51%) compared to both age-matched (TA:

Indexed as

electrical spinal cord stimulationspinal cordspinal motor-evoked responsestroke

Identifiers

PMID33652677
PMCPMC7996860

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.