↓ Skip to main content

The ipsilateral motor cortex contributes to cross‐limb transfer of performance gains after ballistic motor practice

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Physiology, January 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
152 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
226 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
The ipsilateral motor cortex contributes to cross‐limb transfer of performance gains after ballistic motor practice
Published in
Journal of Physiology, January 2010
DOI 10.1113/jphysiol.2009.183855
Pubmed ID
Authors

Michael Lee, Mark R. Hinder, Simon C. Gandevia, Timothy J. Carroll

Abstract

Although it has long been known that practicing a motor task with one limb can improve performance with the limb opposite, the mechanisms remain poorly understood. Here we tested the hypothesis that improved performance with the untrained limb on a fastest possible (i.e. ballistic) movement task depends partly on cortical circuits located ipsilateral to the trained limb. The idea that crossed effects, which are important for the learning process, might occur in the 'untrained' hemisphere following ballistic training is based on the observation that tasks requiring strong descending drive generate extensive bilateral cortical activity. Twenty-one volunteers practiced a ballistic index finger abduction task with their right hand, and corticospinal excitability was assessed in two hand muscles (first dorsal interosseus, FDI; adductor digiti minimi, ADM). Eight control subjects did not train. After training, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS; 15 min at 1 Hz) was applied to the left (trained) or right (untrained) motor cortex to induce a 'virtual lesion'. A third training group received sham rTMS, and control subjects received rTMS to the right motor cortex. Performance and corticospinal excitability (for FDI) increased in both hands for training but not control subjects. rTMS of the left, trained motor cortex specifically reduced training-induced gains in motor performance for the right, trained hand, and rTMS of the right, untrained motor cortex specifically reduced performance gains for the left, untrained hand. Thus, cortical processes within the untrained hemisphere, ipsilateral to the trained hand, contribute to early retention of ballistic performance gains for the untrained limb.

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 226 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 5 2%
Norway 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Australia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Other 1 <1%
Unknown 212 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 41 18%
Researcher 30 13%
Student > Bachelor 29 13%
Student > Master 26 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 9%
Other 24 11%
Unknown 56 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 38 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 37 16%
Neuroscience 35 15%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 18 8%
Psychology 16 7%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 64 28%
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 04 July 2014.
All research outputs
#16,578,616
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Physiology
#7,457
of 9,752 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#142,996
of 173,194 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Physiology
#30
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,752 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.4. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% 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 173,194 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.