MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W171550466

Feasibility of using an implanted neurosensing system to monitor center-of-pressure displacements for control of paraplegic posture

2006· article· en· W171550466 on OpenAlexaff
Jonathan Kerr, J. A. Hoffer

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCenter of pressure (fluid mechanics)Functional electrical stimulationMedicineTibial nervePhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance (ability)BiomechanicsDisplacement (psychology)AnatomyBiomedical engineeringStimulationPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When paraplegic standing is restored with functional electrical stimulation (FES), the main challenges are to maintain balance and avoid fatigue. We evaluated the feasibility of monitoring postural sway with the implanted Neurostep TM system (Victhom Human Bionics) that sensed, amplified and processed the tibial nerve signals during manually imposed lateral sway in standing pigs. We monitored pressure changes under the pig’s hind feet (F-Scan®, Tekscan) and compared to center-of-pressure (COP) displacements during human sway. In humans, pressure in loaded foot sole regions increased by 72±24%. In pigs, similar pressure changes were detected from the tibial nerve signal with 94% accuracy, and 84% of all pig sway events were detected from the tibial nerve signal. Our results suggest that sensory signals from the human foot soles may closely reflect COP displacement and if so, an implanted neurosensing system could provide feedback for closed-loop control of paraplegic posture.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studies→French-language works237,207→