| Title |
What Do We Know About the Influence of the Cerebellum on Walking Ability? Promising Findings from Transcranial Alternating Current Stimulation
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
The Cerebellum, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12311-017-0859-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Antonino Naro, Demetrio Milardi, Alberto Cacciola, Margherita Russo, Francesca Sciarrone, Gianluca La Rosa, Alessia Bramanti, Placido Bramanti, Rocco Salvatore Calabrò |
| Abstract |
Several cerebellar functions related to upper limb motor control have been studied using non-invasive brain stimulation paradigms. We have recently shown that transcranial alternating current stimulation (tACS) may be a promising approach in shaping the plasticity of cerebellum-brain pathways in a safe and effective manner. This study aimed to assess whether cerebellar tACS at different frequencies may tune M1-leg excitability and modify gait control in healthy human subjects. To this end, we tested the effects of different cerebellar tACS frequencies over the right cerebellar hemisphere (at 10, 50, and 300 Hz, besides a sham-tACS) on M1-leg excitability, cerebellum-brain inhibition (CBI), and gait parameters in a sample of 25 healthy volunteers. Fifty and 300 Hz tACS differently modified M1-leg excitability and CBI from both lower limbs, without significant gait perturbations. We hypothesize that tACS aftereffect may depend on a selective entrainment of distinct cerebellar networks related to lower limb motor functions. Therefore, cerebellar tACS might represent a useful tool to modulate walking training in people with cerebellum-related gait impairment, given that tACS may potentially reset abnormal cerebellar circuitries. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 40% |
| Unknown | 3 | 60% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 11 | 21% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 6 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 16 | 30% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 11 | 21% |
| Psychology | 6 | 11% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 11% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 4% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 23 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 01 May 2017.
All research outputs
#13,659,690
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from The Cerebellum
#285
of 957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#151,361
of 314,132 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Cerebellum
#4
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 957 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
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 314,132 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.