MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The Interactive Effect of DOMS and Topical Analgesic on Corticospinal Excitability of the Biceps Brachii

2019· article· en· W2955166916 on OpenAlexaff
Evan J. Lockyer, Lucas Stefanelli, Brandon W. Collins, Nicholas J. Snow, JULIE CROCKER, Christopher Kent, Michael W.R. Holmes, Kevin E. Power, Duane C. Button

Bibliographic record

VenueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsBrock UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDelayed onset muscle sorenessBicepsMedicinePlaceboAnalgesicAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS) is a normal response to strenuous, unfamiliar exercise characterized by muscle swelling, tenderness and pain. Typically arising 24-72 hours following exercise, DOMS results in neuromuscular impairment such as decreased muscular strength and activation. Recently, the application of topical analgesics has been proposed as a possible means to mitigate the symptoms and negative outcomes of DOMS, though the mechanisms of action are not well-understood. It is currently unknown how the presence of DOMS with and without the application of topical analgesia influences central nervous system excitability. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the interactive effects of DOMS and the application of a menthol-based topical analgesic on corticospinal excitability (CSE) to the biceps brachii. METHODS: A total of 32 participants completed two separate experiments; Experiment A (No DOMS; n = 16) and Experiment B (DOMS; n = 16). For each experiment, participants were randomly assigned to two groups: 1) topical analgesic gel (Topical Analgesic, n = 8), or 2) placebo gel (Placebo, n = 8). Prior to the application of gel (pre-gel), as well as 5, 15, 30, and 45 min post-gel, motor evoked potential (MEP) area, latency, and silent period, as well as cervicomedullary MEP (CMEP) and maximal compound motor unit action potential (Mmax) areas and latencies were measured. In addition, pressure-pain threshold (PPT) was measured pre-DOMS and at the same time points in Experiment B. RESULTS: In Experiment A, neither group showed a significant change for any outcome measure. In Experiment B, both groups exhibited a significant decrease in PPT from pre-DOMS to pre-gel (p < .05). Following the application of topical analgesic, but not placebo, there was a significant increase in PPT at 15, 30, and 45 min post-gel (p <.05), respectively compared to pre-gel and an increase in silent period at post-30 and 45 min (p <.05) compared to pre-gel. Participants with DOMS had reduced MEP (p <.02) and CMEP areas (p <.05), and increased MEP silent periods (p <.05) compared to those who did not have DOMS. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that DOMS reduced CSE to the biceps brachii, and that the application of a menthol-based topical analgesic reduced pain, which was accompanied by an increase in corticospinal inhibition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedicine & Science in Sports & Exercise→Same topicPain Mechanisms and Treatments→French-language works237,207→