. 2016 Jun 23;11(6):e0157952. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157952

Table 1. Pianists and controls behavioural and neurophysiological data.

MEP_amplitude and MAP_area are reported as average of APB, ADM and ECR muscles. We included in the table t (or Z) and p values of the post-hoc comparisons if a significant interaction between “group” and “side” factors was obtained from the ANOVA analysis, as well as F and p values if a significant effect of “group” or/and “side” factors was obtained from the ANOVA analyses without significant interaction between factors.

					statistics
	Side	Controls	Pianists	DH vs NDH	DH vs NDH	Controls vs pianists
				Controls	Pianists
	DH	16.2±1.6	15.5 ±0.9			n.s.
NHPT				Z = 2.9; p = 0.003	n.s.
(sec)	NDH	18.2±1.8	15.9±1.8			U = 36.5; Z = 3.14; p = 0.001
	DH	6.1±1.1	6.5±0.7
FT				F_1,22 = 100.6; p<0.001	F_1,22 = 100.6; p<0.001	F_1,22 = 3.8; p = 0.06
	NDH	4.9±0.9	5.6±0.6
	DH	46±5	46±6
RMT				n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
(%)	NDH	48±6	46±5
	DH	638±417	710±447
MEP_amplitude				n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
₍μV)	NDH	591±279	546±278
	DH	18.3±7.1	12.9±3.4			t₍₂₂₎ = 2.4; p = 0.02
Map_area				t₍₁₁₎ = 4.45; p = 0.001	n.s.
(cm²)	NDH	12.1±3.7	13.8±4.3			n.s.
	DH	0.86±0.1	0.85±0.1
CoG_distance				F_1,22 = 15; p = 0.001	F_1,22 = 15; p = 0.001	n.s.
(cm)	NDH	1.58±0.2	1.52±0.3
	DH	0.8±0.09	0.6±0.07			t₍₂₂₎ = 5.1; p<0.001
Overlap				t₍₁₁₎ = 6.7; p<0.001	n.s.
	NDH	0.6±0.09	0.5±0.09			t₍₂₂₎ = 2; p = 0.06
	DH	224,5±128,3	201,8±109,5
EMG				n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
	NDH	245,5±142,4	211,9±102,7
	DH	50.1±3.3	56.9±2.7			n.s.
n-iSP_area				t₍₁₀₎ = 3.7; p = 0.004	n.s.
	NDH	37.9±3.9	53.9±3.1			t₍₂₀₎ = 3.2; p = 0.004
	DH	44±8	41.5±10
iSP_duration				n.s.	n.s.	n.s.
(msec)	NDH	42.0±13	38.8±12

Abbreviations: DH/NDH = dominant/non dominant hemisphere or hand; NHPT = nine hole peg test; RMT = resting motor threshold; MEP = motor evoked potentials; n-iSP_{area =} normalized iSP_area; CoG = center of gravity; n.s. = not significative