ArticleClinical neurophysiology practice2022
Neurophysiological differentiation of upper motor neuron damage in neurodegenerative disorders.
Article in Clinical neurophysiology practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The applications of TMS in brain function assessment and treatment of mental disorders: a narrative review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Review
- Subacute Upper Motor Neuron Dysfunction Possibly Associated with the Anti-GM1 Autoantibody.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
- Sex-specific reference values for total, central, and peripheral latency of motor evoked potentials from a large cohort.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: Using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to delineate upper motor neuron (UMN) signs of two neurodegenerative disorders: amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and multiple system atrophy (MSA). Methods: Medical records including clinical signs for UMN damage and TMS results were reviewed retrospectively. The UMN signs were classified into none, mild, and severe based on neurological examination of various reflexes. Then TMS-elicited motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from a hand and a leg muscle to calculate the central motor conduction time (CMCT), which represents fast, mono-synaptic conduction along the corticospinal tract. Relations between the UMN signs and CMCT were analysed for the two diseases. Results: Prevalence and severity of the UMN signs for ALS and MSA were comparable for both upper and lower limbs. However, abnormality in CMCT was found more frequently in ALS: CMCT abnormalities were found in upper limbs for 44% in ALS patients but only for 7% in MSA patients; CMCT abnormalities in lower limbs were 55% in ALS and 20% in MSA. Some ALS patients showed abnormal CMCT in limbs without UMN signs, which was not true for most MSA patients. Conclusions: The abnormalities of CMCT were different in ALS and MSA, even for those who clinically had similar UMN signs. Sometimes, CMCT can reveal UMN damage in the absence of clinical UMN signs. Differences presumably derive from selective degeneration of different fibres in the motor descending pathways. Longitudinal studies must be conducted to accumulate neuroimaging and pathological findings. Significance: CMCT can be useful to differentiate ALS and MSA.
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.