↓ Skip to main content

Cross-education of muscular strength is facilitated by homeostatic plasticity

Overview of attention for article published in European Journal of Applied Physiology, February 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 Mendeley
Title
Cross-education of muscular strength is facilitated by homeostatic plasticity
Published in
European Journal of Applied Physiology, February 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00421-017-3538-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashlyn K. Frazer, Jacqueline Williams, Michael Spittle, Dawson J. Kidgell

Abstract

We examined the effect of priming the ipsilateral motor cortex (M1) using anodal transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) prior to a single bout of strength training on the cross-transfer of strength and corticospinal excitability and inhibition of the ipsilateral M1. In a randomized double-blinded cross-over design, changes in strength and indices of corticospinal plasticity were analysed in 13 adults who were exposed to 20 min of ipsilateral anodal and sham tDCS (applied to the ipsilateral M1 to the training arm) followed by a single strength training session of the right Biceps Brachii only. The induction of homeostatic plasticity via anodal tDCS priming, significantly increased strength of the untrained left Biceps Brachii (12%) compared to sham tDCS (2%), increased corticospinal excitability (12-33%) and cross-activation (25%) when ipsilateral anodal tDCS was applied to the right M1 prior to a single session of strength training. Interestingly, ipsilateral sham tDCS and strength training resulted in an average increase in MEP amplitude of 2-32%. The novel findings of this study include: priming the ipsilateral M1 via anodal tDCS prior to a single bout of strength training augments the cross-transfer of strength which is manifested by an increase in corticospinal excitability and cross-activation. These findings provide insight into how priming methods that induce homeostatic plasticity may be used to enhance the cross-education phenomenon.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 143 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 24 17%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 4%
Other 19 13%
Unknown 48 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 18 13%
Neuroscience 18 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 18 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 12 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 3%
Other 15 10%
Unknown 57 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 March 2017.
All research outputs
#15,742,933
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#2,985
of 4,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#183,085
of 325,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age from European Journal of Applied Physiology
#61
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,345 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 325,414 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.