Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38002401›Full record

ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2023

The Influence of Different Inter-Trial Intervals on the Quantification of Intracortical Facilitation in the Primary Motor Cortex.

Milan Pantovic, Rhett Boss, Kevin J Noorda, Mario I Premyanov, Daniel G Aynlender, Erik W Wilkins, Sage Boss, Zachary A Riley, Brach Poston

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 43% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Milan PantovicHealth and Human Performance Department, Utah Tech University, St. George, UT 84770, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7985-6546
Rhett BossSchool of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-9964-3614
Kevin J NoordaSchool of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6998-7729
Mario I PremyanovSchool of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.
Daniel G AynlenderSchool of Medicine, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.ORCID 0009-0002-1800-0052
Erik W WilkinsDepartment of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.
Sage BossSchool of Life Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2250-1055
Zachary A RileyDepartment of Kinesiology, Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA.
Brach PostonDepartment of Kinesiology and Nutrition Sciences, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA.
University of Nevada, Las Vegas · USUniversity of Indianapolis · USUtah Tech University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Intracortical facilitation (ICF) is a paired-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) measurement used to quantify interneuron activity in the primary motor cortex (M1) in healthy populations and motor disorders. Due to the prevalence of the technique, most of the stimulation parameters to optimize ICF quantification have been established. However, the underappreciated methodological issue of the time between ICF trials (inter-trial interval; ITI) has been unstandardized, and different ITIs have never been compared in a paired-pulse TMS study. This is important because single-pulse TMS studies have found motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude reductions over time during TMS trial blocks for short, but not long ITIs. The primary purpose was to determine the influence of different ITIs on the measurement of ICF. Twenty adults completed one experimental session that involved 4 separate ICF trial blocks with each utilizing a different ITI (4, 6, 8, and 10 s). Two-way ANOVAs indicated no significant ITI main effects for test MEP amplitudes, condition-test MEP amplitudes, and therefore ICF. Accordingly, all ITIs studied provided nearly identical ICF values when averaged over entire trial blocks. Therefore, it is recommended that ITIs of 4-6 s be utilized for ICF quantification to optimize participant comfort and experiment time efficiency.

Indexed as

electromyographyintracortical facilitationmotor evoked potentialshort-interval intracortical inhibitiontranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID38002401
PMCPMC10669180
OpenAlexW4388219821

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.