Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41727009›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026

Neural mechanisms underlying leg muscle responses during cervical transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation.

Natalie Phelps, Rodolfo Keesey, Rachel Hawthorn, Carolyn Atkinson, Ismael Seáñez

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) of the cervical spinal cord has been thought to modulate lumbar networks, leading to the hypothesis that leg muscle recruitment may occur via recruitment of long-range spinal connections between cervical and lumbar circuits. To directly test this hypothesis, we compared arm and leg muscle responses elicited in unimpaired participants (N = 12) by cervical tSCS with the anodes placed over the iliac crests, with the anodes placed over the clavicles, and with lumbar tSCS as a control for leg muscle recruitment via the posterior root-muscle reflex. The idea of tSCS targeting cervico-lumbar connectivity would suggest that cervical stimulation could evoke responses in leg muscles. However, in our experiments, leg responses via cervical tSCS were only observed when the anodes were placed over the iliac crests, but not over the clavicles. These leg muscle responses had shorter latencies than those with lumbar tSCS and showed minimal post-activation depression, indicating efferent rather than afferent recruitment. Therefore, changes in leg muscle excitability by cervical-iliac tSCS previously attributed to descending cervical circuits could instead be explained by direct recruitment of efferent fibers near the iliac anodes. These findings suggest that cervical tSCS alone does not engage leg muscle motoneurons via long-range spinal or bidirectional pathways. Therefore, our study highlights the need to carefully consider electrode configuration when interpreting cervical tSCS mechanisms and additional or unexpected rehabilitative effects that extend caudally from the cervical spinal cord.

Identifiers

PMID41727009
PMCPMC12919080

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.