ArticlePloS one2025
Upper limb muscle reflexes in real and virtual environments: Insights into sensorimotor adaptations.
Article in PloS one, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe mechanisms influencing neuromuscular adaptations in the upper limb within dynamic environments remain understudied, especially when exposed to altered visual and emotional conditions such as those simulated in virtual reality (VR). Here we utilize VR to manipulate visual feedback, inducing motion sickness and modulating sympathetic arousal, while assessing adaptations in sensorimotor integration in the upper extremity using electrically evoked and muscle stretch reflexes.
methodsEighteen healthy young adults experienced four experimental conditions while sustaining submaximal activation of their flexor carpi radialis (FCR) muscle by isometrically supporting a weighted load: baseline real-world (Pre-VR), stationary VR (VR-BL), dynamic VR with motion perception via a virtual rollercoaster ride (VR-C), and post-VR following re-entry to the real environment (Post-VR). Muscle activity was monitored via electromyography (EMG), while reflex activity was assessed using electrical (H-reflexes) and mechanically induced (noisy tendon vibration; NTV) reflexes in the FCR. Additionally, electrodermal activity (EDA) and psychosocial indicators of motion sickness (subjective questionnaires) were measured throughout.
resultsH-reflex amplitude was suppressed during VR-C, which persisted into Post-VR; whereas NTV-reflexes were unaffected across conditions. Sympathetic arousal (e.g., EDA) and motion sickness symptoms increased significantly during VR-C compared to Pre-VR, but rapidly returned to baseline Post-VR. EMG within the target muscle (FCR) as well as in the brachioradialis was maintained across conditions, though increased activation was observed in the biceps brachii beginning at the onset of VR immersion (VR-BL). DISCUSSION: These findings suggest suppression of spinal excitability (H-reflex) when the perception of motion (VR-C) was added to a stationary VR experience. Meanwhile, muscle spindle sensitivity (NTV-reflex) remained consistent, highlighting potential fusimotor adaptations to maintain sensorimotor function under altered visual and emotional states. Persistent H-reflex suppression post-VR indicates lingering neuromuscular effects of immersive VR, underscoring the need for further exploration of VR's implications for rehabilitation and virtual training environments.
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.