Kinesio-Taping Application and Corticospinal Excitability at the Ankle Joint
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CONTEXT: Physiotherapists and athletic trainers often use Kinesio Taping (KT) to prevent and treat musculoskeletal injuries in athletes, yet evidence about its effects on neuromuscular performance is conflicting. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of a KT application directed at the ankle joint on measures of corticospinal excitability with transcranial magnetic stimulation. DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. SETTING: Research laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Twelve healthy young women (age = 23.1 ± 1.9 years; range, 19-26 years). INTERVENTION(S): Participants were tested under no-tape and KT conditions according to a random sequence order. The KT was applied to the skin overlying the dorsiflexor and plantar-flexor muscles of the ankle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We assessed changes in the amplitude of motor-evoked potentials elicited at rest and during movement and changes in the silent period and background muscle activity during movement. RESULTS: Taping conditions had no effect on motor-evoked potential amplitude at rest or during movement or on the silent-period duration and background muscle activity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results concur with other recent reports, showing KT applications have little influence at the neuromuscular level. Alterations in sensory feedback ascribed to elastic taping are likely insufficient to modulate corticospinal excitability in a functionally meaningful manner.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".