The pulse duration of electrical stimulation influences H-reflexes but not corticospinal excitability for tibialis anterior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The afferent volley generated by neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) influences corticospinal (CS) excitability and frequent NMES sessions can strengthen CS pathways, resulting in long-term improvements in function. This afferent volley can be altered by manipulating NMES parameters. Presently, we manipulated one such parameter, pulse duration, during NMES over the common peroneal nerve and assessed the influence on H-reflexes and CS excitability. We hypothesized that compared with shorter pulse durations, longer pulses would (i) shift the H-reflex recruitment curve to the left, relative to the M-wave curve; and (ii) increase CS excitability more. Using 3 pulse durations (50, 200, 1000 μs), M-wave and H-reflex recruitment curves were collected and, in separate experiments, CS excitability was assessed by comparing motor evoked potentials elicited before and after 30 min of NMES. Despite finding a leftward shift in the H-reflex recruitment curve when using the 1000 μs pulse duration, consistent with a larger afferent volley for a given efferent volley, the increases in CS excitability were not influenced by pulse duration. Hence, although manipulating pulse duration can alter the relative recruitment of afferents and efferents in the common peroneal nerve, under the present experimental conditions it is ineffective for maximizing CS excitability for rehabilitation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".