↓ Skip to main content

Effect of Paired-Pulse Electrical Stimulation on the Activity of Cortical Circuits

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 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
Effect of Paired-Pulse Electrical Stimulation on the Activity of Cortical Circuits
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, December 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00671
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kei Saito, Hideaki Onishi, Shota Miyaguchi, Shinichi Kotan, Shuhei Fujimoto

Abstract

We investigated the transient effect of short-duration paired-pulse electrical stimulation (ppES) on corticospinal excitability and the after-effect of long-duration ppES on excitability, short-latency afferent inhibition (SAI), and afferent facilitation (AF). A total of 28 healthy subjects participated in two different experiments. In Experiment 1, motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were measured in the abductor pollicis brevis (APB) and abductor digiti minimi (ADM) muscles before and immediately after short-duration ppES (5 s) at various inter-pulse intervals (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 15, 20, and 30 ms). In Experiment 2, MEPs, SAI, and AF were measured before, immediately, and 20 and 40 min after long-duration ppES (20 min, inter-pulse interval of 5 and 15 ms) and peripheral electrical stimulation (20 min, 10 and 20 Hz). Short-duration ppES with inter-pulse intervals of 5 and 20 ms significantly increased MEP measured in APB but not in ADM. Long-duration ppES with an inter-pulse interval of 5 ms significantly decreased SAI but not MEPs in APB. In contrast, long-duration ppES did not affect ADM. The afferent inputs induced by ppES-5 ms were effective for transiently increasing MEP and sustaining SAI reduction.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 20%
Researcher 4 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 16%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 6 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 20%
Psychology 3 12%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Social Sciences 1 4%
Other 3 12%
Unknown 5 20%
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 22 December 2015.
All research outputs
#20,299,108
of 22,836,570 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,543
of 7,155 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,731
of 390,618 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#126
of 143 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,836,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,155 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 390,618 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 143 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.