ArticleExperimental brain research2021
Motor evoked potential latency and duration from tibialis anterior in individuals with chronic stroke.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Corticospinal Responses Following Gait-Specific Training in Stroke Survivors: A Systematic Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Pooled it
- Safety & efficacy of a robotic hip exoskeleton on outpatient stroke rehabilitation.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2024Trial
- Reliability of Motor Evoked Potential Identification in Pediatric Populations.Transcranial magnetic stimulation (2024) · 2025Article
- Longitudinal study of single-pulse TMS in infants with perinatal brain injury: safety and feasibility.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Role of the Contra-Lesional Corticoreticular Tract in Motor Recovery of the Paretic Leg in Stroke: A Mini-Narrative Review.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Ipsilateral motor pathways from the contralesional hemisphere to the paretic limbs may be upregulated to compensate for impaired function after stroke. Onset latency and duration of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) provide insight into compensatory pathways but have been understudied in the lower limb. This study assessed MEP onset latency and duration in the lower limb after stroke, and compared ipsilateral and contralateral MEPs in the paretic and non-paretic limb. We hypothesized that: (1) onset latency would be longer for ipsilateral than contralateral MEPs and longer for the paretic than the non-paretic limb, and (2) duration would be shorter for ipsilateral than contralateral MEPs and longer for the paretic than the non-paretic limb. Data were collected as a part of a pre-test of a randomized controlled trial. TMS was applied to the ipsilateral and contralateral hemisphere of the paretic and non-paretic limb. MEP onset latency and duration were calculated from the tibialis anterior. Thirty-five participants with chronic stroke were included in the final analysis. Onset latency was longer in the paretic than the non-paretic limb (~ 6.0 ms) and longer after ipsilateral than contralateral stimulation (~ 1.8 ms). Duration was longer in the paretic than the non-paretic limb (~ 9.2 ms) and longer after contralateral than ipsilateral stimulation (~ 5.2 ms). Ipsilateral MEPs may be elicited through ipsilateral pathways with fewer fibers with a higher activation threshold and/or greater spinal branching. MEPs from the paretic limb may reflect slower central motor conduction, peripheral changes, or changes in motor pathway.
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.