ArticleBrain sciences2022
Difference between the Effects of Peripheral Sensory Nerve Electrical Stimulation on the Excitability of the Primary Motor Cortex: Examination of the Combinations of Stimulus Frequency and Duration.
Article in Brain sciences, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- fNIRS-Based Network Signatures of Sensory-Primed Bilateral Arm Training in Subacute Stroke Recovery.Journal of biophotonics · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Peripheral sensory nerve electrical stimulation (PES) excites the primary motor cortex and is expected to improve motor dysfunction post-stroke. However, previous studies have reported a variety of stimulus frequencies and stimulus duration settings, and the effects of these different combinations on primary motor cortex excitability are not clear. We aimed to clarify the effects of different combinations of stimulus frequency and stimulus duration of PES on the excitation of primary motor cortex. Twenty-one healthy individuals (aged > 18 years, right-handed, and without a history of neurological or orthopedic disorders) were included. Each participant experienced three different stimulation frequencies (1, 10 and 50 Hz) and durations (20, 40 and 60 min). Motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded pre- and post-PES. The outcome measure was the change in primary motor cortex excitability using the MEP ratio. We used a D-optimal design of experiments and response surface analysis to define the optimal combination within nine different settings inducing more satisfying responses. The combination of stimulation frequency and stimulation time that maximized the desirability value was 10 Hz and 40 min, respectively. The results of this study may provide fundamental data for more minimally invasive and effective implementation of PES in patients with stroke.
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.