↓ Skip to main content

The stability of Mmax and Hmax amplitude over time

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, March 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
Title
The stability of Mmax and Hmax amplitude over time
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, March 2012
DOI 10.1007/s00221-012-3053-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Penelope A. McNulty, Christine T. Shiner, Ganesha K. Thayaparan, David Burke

Abstract

The stability of the maximal muscle response (M(max)) is critical to H reflex methodology. It has previously been reported that the amplitude of M(max) declines over time. If reproducible, this finding would have implications for all experimental studies that normalise the output of the motoneurone pool against the M wave. We investigated the effect of time on changes in M(max) and the maximal H reflex (H(max)) evoked at 4-s intervals over 60 min. To identify an influence of homosynaptic depression, we extended the interstimulus interval to 10 s and the time to 100 min. Two recording montages over soleus were used to ensure that interelectrode distance was not a critical factor. The soleus M(max) and H reflex were evoked by stimulation of the tibial nerve in the popliteal fossa in 7 subjects who sat with the knee flexed to 30° and the ankle plantar flexed by ~30°. We found no change in the pooled data for M(max), H(max), a reflex 50% of maximal, or the current required to produce it. However, one subject had a statistically significant increase in M(max) and a concurrent decrease in H(max) regardless of the interstimulus interval. On average, there was no change in the H(max)/M(max) ratio over time. While both M(max) and H(max) may change in response to many factors, these results suggest that, typically, time is not one of them.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 22%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Other 4 11%
Student > Master 3 8%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Sports and Recreations 8 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 19%
Neuroscience 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Psychology 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 9 24%
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 29 August 2012.
All research outputs
#18,313,878
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,473
of 3,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#121,373
of 156,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#20
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,217 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% 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 156,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.