Intermediate Muscle Length and Tendon Vibration Optimize Corticospinal Excitability During Knee Extensors Local Vibration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While local vibration (LV) has been recently proposed as a potential modality for neuromuscular conditioning, no practical recommendations to optimize its effects have been published. Because changes in corticospinal excitability may reflect at which degree the neuromuscular function is modulated during LV exposure, this study investigated the effects of muscle length and vibration site on LV-induced on motor evoked potentials (MEPs) changes. Twenty-one subjects participated in a single session in which MEPs were evoked on the relaxed knee extensors (KE) during three conditions, i.e. no vibration (CON), muscle (VIBMU) and tendon vibration (VIBTD). Three muscle lengths were tested for each condition, i.e. short/intermediate/long KE muscle length. Both VIBMU and VIBTD significantly increase MEPs compared to CON. Higher increases (P < 0.001) were found for VIBTD compared to VIBMU for vastus lateralis (mean increases of the three angles: + 241% vs. + 148%), vastus medialis (+ 273% vs. + 180%) and rectus femoris muscles (+ 191% vs. + 141%). The increase in MEPs amplitude was higher (p < 0.001) at an intermediate (mean pooled increase for VIBTD and VIBMU: + 265%, + 290% and + 212% for VL, VM and RF, respectively) compared to short (+ 136%, + 144% and + 127%) or long (+ 184%, + 246% and + 160%) muscle lengths. These results suggest that LV should be applied to the tendon at an intermediate muscle length to optimize the acute effects of LV on the KE neuromuscular function.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".