↓ Skip to main content

Plantar flexion force induced by amplitude-modulated tendon vibration and associated soleus V/F-waves as an evidence of a centrally-mediated mechanism contributing to extra torque generation in humans

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
63 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
Plantar flexion force induced by amplitude-modulated tendon vibration and associated soleus V/F-waves as an evidence of a centrally-mediated mechanism contributing to extra torque generation in humans
Published in
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1743-0003-10-32
Pubmed ID
Authors

Fernando Henrique Magalhães, Diana Rezende de Toledo, André Fabio Kohn

Abstract

High-frequency trains of electrical stimulation applied over the human muscles can generate forces higher than would be expected by direct activation of motor axons, as evidenced by an unexpected relation between the stimuli and the evoked contractions, originating what has been called "extra forces". This phenomenon has been thought to reflect nonlinear input/output neural properties such as plateau potential activation in motoneurons. However, more recent evidence has indicated that extra forces generated during electrical stimulation are mediated primarily, if not exclusively, by an intrinsic muscle property, and not from a central mechanism as previously thought. Given the inherent differences between electrical and vibratory stimuli, this study aimed to investigate: (a) whether the generation of vibration-induced muscle forces results in an unexpected relation between the stimuli and the evoked contractions (i.e. extra forces generation) and (b) whether these extra forces are accompanied by signs of a centrally-mediated mechanism or whether intrinsic muscle properties are the predominant mechanisms.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Uruguay 1 2%
Unknown 60 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 21%
Student > Master 9 14%
Researcher 9 14%
Professor 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 8%
Other 12 19%
Unknown 9 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 11 17%
Neuroscience 10 16%
Sports and Recreations 10 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 8%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 17 27%
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 23 May 2016.
All research outputs
#20,674,485
of 25,394,764 outputs
Outputs from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#1,091
of 1,414 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#161,821
of 210,266 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
#12
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,394,764 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,414 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% 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 210,266 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.