MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1975831126 · doi:10.1139/y04-068

Adaptive changes of locomotion after central and peripheral lesions

2004· review· en· W1975831126 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Serge Rossignol, Edna Brustein, Laurent J. Bouyer, Dorothy Barthélemy, C Langlet, Hugues Leblond

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · 2004
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicVeterinary Orthopedics and Neurology
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinal cordDenervationNeuroscienceCATSPeripheralMedicineCentral pattern generatorNeuroplasticitySpinal nerveAnatomyLesionBiologyPathologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews findings on the adaptive changes of locomotion in cats after spinal cord or peripheral nerve lesions. From the results obtained after lesions of the ventral/ventrolateral pathways or the dorsal/dorsolateral pathways, we conclude that with extensive but partial spinal lesions, cats can regain voluntary quadrupedal locomotion on a treadmill. Although tract-specific deficits remain after such lesions, intact descending tracts can compensate for the lesioned tracts and access the spinal network to generate voluntary locomotion. Such neuroplasticity of locomotor control mechanisms is also demonstrated after peripheral nerve lesions in cats with intact or lesioned spinal cords. Some models have shown that recovery from such peripheral nerve lesions probably involves changes at the supra spinal and spinal levels. In the case of somesthesic denervation of the hindpaws, we demonstrated that cats with a complete spinal section need some cutaneous inputs to walk with a plantigrade locomotion, and that even in this spinal state, cats can adapt their locomotion to partial cutaneous denervation. Altogether, these results suggest that there is significant plasticity in spinal and supraspinal locomotor controls to justify the beneficial effects of early proactive and sustained locomotor training after central (Rossignol and Barbeau 1995; Barbeau et al. 1998) or peripheral lesions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations37
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Physiology and PharmacologySame topicVeterinary Orthopedics and NeurologyFrench-language works237,207