ArticleExperimental brain research2025
Effects of stepping practice and functional electrical stmulation on neuromotor excitability in able bodied young adults.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The neural processes underlying gait retraining interventions that combine stepping practice with electrical stimulation are poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to compare acute changes in corticomotor excitability measured by motor evoked potential (MEP) amplitude, monosynaptic stretch reflex excitability measured by H/M ratio, and propulsive force generation during gait measured by anterior ground reaction forces (AGRF), induced by 30-minutes of fast walking (Fast) and 30-minutes of fast walking with functional electrical stimulation of the ankle plantarflexors and dorsiflexors (FastFES) in 14 able-bodied young adults. Our results showed that FastFES, but not Fast elicited a significant acute decrease in tibialis anterior MEP amplitude (p = .01). Furthermore, the practice-induced acute decrease in tibialis anterior MEP amplitudes was significantly larger for FastFES than Fast (p = .04). FastFES also elicited a statistically significant increase in the AGRF in the tested limb (p = .01), which was significantly larger than the change induced by Fast (p = .04). Additionally, baseline soleus MEP amplitude was positively correlated with within-session change in AGRF (p = .04, r
Indexed as
Identifiers
40320480What 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.