MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1074196631 · doi:10.1097/wnp.0000000000000172

Motor and Sensory Axon Excitability Properties From the Median and Ulnar Nerves and the Effects of Age on These Properties

2015· article· en· W1074196631 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Hsing‐Jung Lai, Ya‐Wen Chiang, Ming‐Jen Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Program for BiopharmaceuticalsMinistry of Science and Technology, TaiwanSustainable Development Technology Canada
KeywordsUlnar nerveSensory systemAxonRheobaseNeuroscienceMedicineMedian nerveAnatomyElectrophysiologyPsychologyElbow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Threshold tracking is a new noninvasive approach for detecting axonal excitability changes in vivo. In this study, the authors compared the excitability indices of motor and sensory axons of median and ulnar nerves to determine whether the two nerves behave in a similar or a noninterchangeable way. They also examined whether age affects these indices. METHODS: Seventy normal subjects aged 22-70 years (mean, 36.7 ± 12.5 years) were recruited. Multiple excitability indices were measured in both motor and sensory axons from median and ulnar nerves. RESULTS: The threshold and rheobase were significantly higher for the ulnar motor axons recorded at the first dorsal interosseous muscle than for the median motor axons at the abductor pollicis brevis muscle. In contrast, the strength-duration time constant was decreased, threshold electrotonus reduction (in both depolarizing and hyperpolarizing directions) was significantly smaller, I/V slope was decreased, and subexcitability was reduced for the ulnar motor axons. Excitability indices measured in the sensory axons of both nerves were not overtly different. In R-square analysis, age had a homogeneous influence on sensory axon excitability but heterogeneous influence on motor axon excitability. CONCLUSIONS: The excitability indices may be interchangeable for sensory axons but not motor axons. The authors therefore recommend recording motor axonal excitability in various muscle groups rather than a single muscle group.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Citations8
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical NeurophysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207