ライフサイエンスコーパス: motor threshold

1 nhibitory cTBS) or 30% (sham cTBS) of active motor threshold.

2 ball electrode at 30%, 60%, 90% and 300% of motor threshold.

3 after 600 pulses of 5 Hz rTMS at 90% resting motor threshold.

4 t of SICI at CSIs at or below 80% of resting motor threshold.

5 TMS or sham stimulation for 9 days at 90% of motor threshold.

6 d for the first MEP peak was <= 70 % resting motor threshold.

7 stimulus (S2) was set to 90 % of the resting motor threshold.

8 d rTMS to the left prefrontal cortex at 120% motor threshold (10 Hz, 4-second train duration, and 26-

9 itive transcranial magnetic stimulation (80% motor threshold, 20 Hz/2 seconds per minute for 20 minut

10 eal high-frequency rTMS (10 Hz, 100% resting motor threshold, 5-sec on, 10-sec off for 15 min; 3000 p

11 tion was characterized by a higher diaphragm motor threshold, a greater proportional increase in moto

12 We measured resting motor threshold, active motor threshold, input/output cu

13 ir initial impairment, and ipsilesional rest motor threshold also resolved by 70%.

14 rTMS over SMA at an intensity of 110% active motor threshold (AMT) for the first dorsal interosseous

15 rTMS at 1 Hz and an intensity of 90% active motor threshold (AMT) produced a lasting decrease in cor

16 e intensity of stimulation was 80% of active motor threshold (AMT), and a total of 600 pulses were ap

17 facilitation (ICF), resting (rMT) and active motor thresholds (aMT) were recorded before and after a

18 nd ICF by four intensities (60-90% of active motor threshold, AMT) of the conditioning stimulus (S1)

19 Cortical excitability was assessed with motor threshold and intracortical facilitation measures.

20 lity was quantified using resting and active motor thresholds and stimulus-response curves of the fir

21 oke survivors with high fatigue exhibit high motor thresholds and those who perceive high effort have

22 nscranial magnetic stimulation, 20 Hz at 80% motor threshold) and 2 weeks of sham treatment.

23 imulus intensities (CSIs; 40-100% of resting motor threshold) and at interstimulus intervals (ISIs) o

24 We measured resting and active motor thresholds, and short-interval intracortical inhib

25 rical stimulation there was no difference in motor threshold between the two sides.

26 he motor cortex were conditioned by a single motor threshold electrical stimulus to the median nerve

27 We measured resting motor threshold, active motor threshold, input/output curve, short interval intr

28 We found no difference in motor thresholds, input/output curves or cortical silent

29 The resting motor threshold intensity to transcranial magnetic stimu

30 fter 30 min of peroneal nerve stimulation at motor threshold intensity.

31 There were no specific changes in motor thresholds, intracortical circuits, or recruitment

32 5 parameters using a custom-made algorithm: motor threshold, latency, area-under-the-curve, peak-to-

33 Cortical excitability was assessed using motor threshold (MT) and paired pulse stimulation at sho

34 E-field models with amplitude titrations of motor threshold (MT) and seizure threshold (ST) in four

35 cord stimulation (SCS) at intensities below motor threshold (MT) produces cutaneous vasodilation thr

36 hold (ST) by a non-convulsive measurement of motor threshold (MT) using single pulses delivered throu

37 r 500 Hz was applied at 30%, 60%, and 90% of motor threshold (MT) using standard square waves.

38 fferentation were probed with TMS, measuring motor threshold (MT), motor evoked-potential (MEP) size,

39 ball electrode at 30%, 60%, 90% and 300% of motor threshold (MT).

40 ct SCS-induced vasodilation at 30 and 60% of motor threshold (MT).

41 < .05) as well as a reduction in the resting motor threshold (P < .05) and cortical silent period dur

42 Resting motor threshold (R = 0.384; 95% confidence interval = 0.

43 at an intensity of either 90 or 110% resting motor threshold (RMT) suppressed motor-evoked potentials

44 primary motor cortex (M1), we tested resting motor thresholds (RMT), recruitments curves to transcran

45 A single TMS pulse (110% resting motor threshold, RMT) to the left dorsal premotor cortex

46 eshold with S2 held constant at 90 % resting motor threshold showed that the threshold for the first

47 re found between groups in resting or active motor threshold, SICI threshold, or the extent of SICI a

48 de showed normal RST projections and reduced motor thresholds, suggestive of precocious development.

49 g, but not 50 mg, of S44819 decreased active motor threshold, the intensity needed to produce a motor

50 h an earpiece, and electrical stimuli around motor threshold to the biceps muscle via surface electro

51 persistent AVHs as a group, especially when motor threshold was consistently detected.

52 After limiting analyses to patients whose motor threshold was detected consistently: 1) endpoint H

53 The threshold for inhibition (0.7 active motor threshold) was slightly lower than that for facili

54 Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) and motor threshold were recorded from extensor carpi radial

55 ves in small hand muscles were depressed and motor thresholds were elevated compared with aged-matche

56 , 5 d rTMS to motor cortex decreased resting motor threshold, which correlates with heightened BDNF-T

57 he S1 intensity between 70 and 130 % resting motor threshold with S2 held constant at 90 % resting mo