MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967239148 · doi:10.1089/neu.2006.23.571

Physical Determinants, Emerging Concepts, and Training Approaches in Gait of Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury

2006· review· en· W1967239148 on OpenAlexaff
Hugues Barbeau, Sylvie Nadeau, Christiane Garneau

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre for Interdisciplinary Research in RehabilitationJewish Rehabilitation Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGaitRehabilitationSpinal cord injuryPsychological interventionSTRIDEGait trainingPhysical therapyMedicinePsychologySpinal cordNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this review is to examine the physical determinants for functional walking as well as the efficacy of gait rehabilitation after spinal cord injury (SCI) in humans. The results indicate several important physical determinants in gait. Examples are provided of different interventions that produce beneficial effects on outcome measures of gait such as gait speed, stride length, walking endurance, motor recovery, and gait quality. These findings need to be considered in current SCI rehabilitation practices, but the efficacy of certain interventions remains unclear. Well-designed clinical trials are needed to provide evidence of the role of physical determinants in the development of new concepts and principles in locomotor recovery after SCI. This review focuses on relevant literature, and informs rehabilitation specialists and basic scientists about the physical determinants and factors to consider for optimization of gait training in individuals with incomplete SCI.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.161 · 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.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations105
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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