MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1508157905 · doi:10.1089/neu.2014.3707

The Effect of Whole-Body Resonance Vibration in a Porcine Model of Spinal Cord Injury

2015· article· en· W1508157905 on OpenAlexaff
Femke Streijger, Jae H.T. Lee, Jason D. Chak, Dan Dressler, Neda Manouchehri, Elena B. Okon, Lisa M. Anderson, Angela D. Melnyk, Peter A. Cripton, Brian K. Kwon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesVancouver Spine Surgery InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinal cordSpinal cord injuryWhole body vibrationMagnetic resonance imagingMedicineWhite matterAnesthesiaAnatomyVibrationRadiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole-body vibration has been identified as a potential stressor to spinal cord injury (SCI) patients during pre-hospital transportation. However, the effect that such vibration has on the acutely injured spinal cord is largely unknown, particularly in the frequency domain of 5 Hz in which resonance of the spine occurs. The objective of the study was to investigate the consequences of resonance vibration on the injured spinal cord. Using our previously characterized porcine model of SCI, we subjected animals to resonance vibration (5.7±0.46 Hz) or no vibration for a period of 1.5 or 3.0 h. Locomotor function was assessed weekly and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples were collected to assess different inflammatory and injury severity markers. Spinal cords were evaluated histologically to quantify preserved white and gray matter. No significant differences were found between groups for CSF levels of monocyte chemotactic protein-1, interleukin 6 (IL-6) and lL-8. Glial fibrillary acidic protein levels were lower in the resonance vibration group, compared with the non-vibrated control group. Spared white matter tissue was increased within the vibrated group at 7 d post-injury but this difference was not apparent at the 12-week time-point. No significant difference was observed in locomotor recovery following resonance vibration of the spine. Here, we demonstrate that exposure to resonance vibration for 1.5 or 3 h following SCI in our porcine model is not detrimental to the functional or histological outcomes. Our observation that a 3.0-h period of vibration at resonance frequency induces modest histological improvement at one week post-injury warrants further study.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.320
Threshold uncertainty score0.304

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.125
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations26
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207