↓ Skip to main content

Motor cortical plasticity induced by motor learning through mental practice

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
5 X users
q&a
2 Q&A threads

Readers on

mendeley
206 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
Motor cortical plasticity induced by motor learning through mental practice
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, April 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00105
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laura Avanzino, Nicolas Gueugneau, Ambra Bisio, Piero Ruggeri, Charalambos Papaxanthis, Marco Bove

Abstract

Several investigations suggest that actual and mental actions trigger similar neural substrates. Motor learning via physical practice results in long-term potentiation (LTP)-like plasticity processes, namely potentiation of M1 and a temporary occlusion of additional LTP-like plasticity. However, whether this neuroplasticity process contributes to improve motor performance through mental practice remains to be determined. Here, we tested skill learning-dependent changes in primary motor cortex (M1) excitability and plasticity by means of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in subjects trained to physically execute or mentally perform a sequence of finger opposition movements. Before and after physical practice and motor-imagery practice, M1 excitability was evaluated by measuring the input-output (IO) curve of motor evoked potentials. M1 LTP and long-term depression (LTD)-like plasticity was assessed with paired-associative stimulation (PAS) of the median nerve and motor cortex using an interstimulus interval of 25 ms (PAS25) or 10 ms (PAS10), respectively. We found that even if after both practice sessions subjects significantly improved their movement speed, M1 excitability and plasticity were differentially influenced by the two practice sessions. First, we observed an increase in the slope of IO curve after physical but not after MI practice. Second, there was a reversal of the PAS25 effect from LTP-like plasticity to LTD-like plasticity following physical and MI practice. Third, LTD-like plasticity (PAS10 protocol) increased after physical practice, whilst it was occluded after MI practice. In conclusion, we demonstrated that MI practice lead to the development of neuroplasticity, as it affected the PAS25- and PAS10- induced plasticity in M1. These results, expanding the current knowledge on how MI training shapes M1 plasticity, might have a potential impact in rehabilitation.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 206 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Serbia 1 <1%
Unknown 203 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 15%
Student > Master 31 15%
Student > Bachelor 30 15%
Researcher 29 14%
Student > Postgraduate 16 8%
Other 31 15%
Unknown 38 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 42 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 28 14%
Psychology 23 11%
Sports and Recreations 20 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 5%
Other 32 16%
Unknown 51 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 16. 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 30 July 2020.
All research outputs
#2,215,745
of 25,320,147 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#362
of 3,444 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#27,403
of 271,110 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#5
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,320,147 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,444 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% 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 271,110 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.