↓ Skip to main content

In Standing, Corticospinal Excitability Is Proportional to COP Velocity Whereas M1 Excitability Is Participant-Specific

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
In Standing, Corticospinal Excitability Is Proportional to COP Velocity Whereas M1 Excitability Is Participant-Specific
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2018.00303
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tulika Nandi, Claudine J. C. Lamoth, Helco G. van Keeken, Lisanne B. M. Bakker, Iris Kok, George J. Salem, Beth E. Fisher, Tibor Hortobágyi

Abstract

Reductions in the base of support (BOS) make standing difficult and require adjustments in the neural control of sway. In healthy young adults, we determined the effects of reductions in mediolateral (ML) BOS on peroneus longus (PL) motor evoked potential (MEP), intracortical facilitation (ICF), short interval intracortical inhibition (SICI) and long interval intracortical inhibition (LICI) using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). We also examined whether participant-specific neural excitability influences the responses to increasing standing difficulty. Repeated measures ANOVA revealed that with increasing standing difficulty MEP size increased, SICI decreased (both p < 0.05) and ICF trended to decrease (p = 0.07). LICI decreased only in a sub-set of participants, demonstrating atypical facilitation. Spearman's Rank Correlation showed a relationship of ρ = 0.50 (p = 0.001) between MEP size and ML center of pressure (COP) velocity. Measures of M1 excitability did not correlate with COP velocity. LICI and ICF measured in the control task correlated with changes in LICI and ICF, i.e., the magnitude of response to increasing standing difficulty. Therefore, corticospinal excitability as measured by MEP size contributes to ML sway control while cortical facilitation and inhibition are likely involved in other aspects of sway control while standing. Additionally, neural excitability in standing is determined by an interaction between task difficulty and participant-specific neural excitability.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 23%
Student > Master 6 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 16%
Researcher 3 10%
Professor 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 23%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 16%
Sports and Recreations 5 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 16%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 8 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 August 2018.
All research outputs
#20,611,666
of 26,189,645 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,111
of 7,803 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#253,113
of 344,273 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#102
of 116 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,189,645 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,803 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 344,273 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 116 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.