↓ Skip to main content

Movement and afferent representations in human motor areas: a simultaneous neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic/peripheral nerve-stimulation study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
57 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
Movement and afferent representations in human motor areas: a simultaneous neuroimaging and transcranial magnetic/peripheral nerve-stimulation study
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00554
Pubmed ID
Authors

H. Shitara, T. Shinozaki, K. Takagishi, M. Honda, T. Hanakawa

Abstract

Neuroimaging combined with transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) to primary motor cortex (M1) is an emerging technique that can examine motor-system functionality through evoked activity. However, because sensory afferents from twitching muscles are widely represented in motor areas the amount of evoked activity directly resulting from TMS remains unclear. We delivered suprathreshold TMS to left M1 or gave electrical right median nerve stimulation (MNS) in 18 healthy volunteers while simultaneously conducting functional magnetic resonance imaging and monitoring with electromyography (EMG). We examined in detail the localization of TMS-, muscle afferent- and superficial afferent-induced activity in M1 subdivisions. Muscle afferent- and TMS-evoked activity occurred mainly in rostral M1, while superficial afferents generated a slightly different activation distribution. In 12 participants who yielded quantifiable EMG, differences in brain activity ascribed to differences in movement-size were adjusted using integrated information from the EMGs. Sensory components only explained 10-20% of the suprathreshold TMS-induced activity, indicating that locally and remotely evoked activity in motor areas mostly resulted from the recruitment of neural and synaptic activity. The present study appears to justify the use of fMRI combined with suprathreshold TMS to M1 for evoked motor network imaging.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 54 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 25%
Researcher 12 21%
Student > Master 6 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 7 12%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 12 21%
Engineering 8 14%
Psychology 7 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 9%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 14 25%
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 17 September 2013.
All research outputs
#19,034,517
of 24,240,330 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,912
of 7,441 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#219,011
of 288,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#722
of 860 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,240,330 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,441 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 288,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 860 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.