ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2025
Comparison of contralateral muscle excitation in proximal versus distal muscles in the upper extremities.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of the study was to investigate potential differences in contralateral muscle excitation in proximal versus distal muscles in the upper extremities. Based on the different neuroanatomical and neurophysiological constraints in the central part of the neural system for proximal and distal muscles, it was hypothesized that contralateral muscle excitation (CME) would be higher for proximal than distal muscles. Methods: Thirteen university students participated in this study. The participants performed isometric flexion movements with the shoulder and index finger of the dominant arm at four different relative force levels (25, 50, 75, 100%). Force was measured with a force transducer connected to the index finger and elbow on the dominant arm. Muscle excitation was measured using sEMG placed on the flexor carpi radialis (distal condition) and the anterior deltoid (proximal condition) on the non-dominant arm. Results: CME was observed in both proximal and distal muscles, with proximal muscles displaying significantly higher CME at higher force levels (50, 75, and 100%). In the proximal condition, contractions with the dominant anterior deltoid were associated with a progressive increase in CME across force levels in the contralateral homologous muscle. In contrast, for the distal condition (flexor carpi radialis), CME changes were only evident when comparing the lowest and highest force levels. Conclusion: The results are in coherence with the differences in neuroanatomical and neurophysiological constraints for bilateral communication for proximal versus distal muscles. The present results encourage further neurophysiological studies using direct brain activity measures to explore the potential link between the differences in bilateral communication and CME for proximal versus distal muscles.
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.