Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35501123›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2022

Can training of a skilled pelvic movement change corticomotor control of back muscles? Comparison of single and paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation.

Muath A Shraim, Hugo Massé-Alarie, Sauro E Salomoni, Paul W Hodges

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Muath A ShraimNHMRC Centre of Clinical Research Excellence in Spinal Pain, Injury and Health, School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland.ORCID 0000-0003-2064-9467
Hugo Massé-AlarieNHMRC Centre of Clinical Research Excellence in Spinal Pain, Injury and Health, School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland.ORCID 0000-0003-4472-9656
Sauro E SalomoniNHMRC Centre of Clinical Research Excellence in Spinal Pain, Injury and Health, School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland.
Paul W HodgesNHMRC Centre of Clinical Research Excellence in Spinal Pain, Injury and Health, School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland.ORCID 0000-0002-1206-9107
Queensland Health · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence suggests excitability of the motor cortex (M1) changes in response to motor skill learning of the upper limb. Few studies have examined immediate changes in corticospinal excitability and intra-cortical mechanisms following motor learning in the lower back. Further, it is unknown which transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) paradigms are likely to reveal changes in cortical function in this region. This study aimed to (1) compare corticospinal excitability and intra-cortical mechanisms in the lower back region of M1 before and after a single session of lumbopelvic tilt motor learning task in healthy people and (2) compare these measures between two TMS coils and two methods of recruitment curve (RC) acquisition. Twenty-eight young participants (23.6 ± 4.6 years) completed a lumbopelvic tilting task involving three 5-min blocks. Single-pulse (RC from 70% to 150% of active motor threshold) and paired-pulse TMS measures (ICF, SICF and SICI) were undertaken before (using 2 coils: figure-of-8 and double cone) and after (using double cone coil only) training. RCs were also acquired using a traditional and rapid method. A significant increase in corticospinal excitability was found after training as measured by RC intensities, but this was not related to the RC slope. No significant differences were found for paired-pulse measures after training. Finally, there was good agreement between RC parameters when measured with the two different TMS coils or different acquisition methods (traditional vs. rapid). Changes in corticospinal excitability after a single session of lumbopelvic motor learning task are seen, but these changes are not explained by changes in intra-cortical mechanisms.

Indexed as

Back MusclesMotor CortexEvoked Potentials, MotorHumansMovementTranscranial Magnetic Stimulationcorticospinal excitabilityintra-cortical mechanisms.lower back musclemotor skill learningrecruitment curvetranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID35501123
PMCPMC9540878
OpenAlexW4225329235

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.