MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996934033 · doi:10.1113/jphysiol.2002.023846

Finger movement is associated with attenuated cutaneous reflexes recorded from human first dorsal interosseous muscle

2002· article· en· W1996934033 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Carol Turner, Linda M. Harrison, John A. Stephens

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsSt Mary's Hospital Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndex fingerMiddle fingerThumbSomatosensory systemAnatomySomatosensory evoked potentialMedicineLittle fingerDorsumReflexFinger tappingSensory systemMedian nerveTappingNeuroscienceAudiologyAnesthesiaPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cutaneomuscular reflexes (CMR) have been recorded from the first dorsal interosseous muscle (1DI) of the preferred hand, somatosensory evoked potentials (SEP) were recorded from the contralateral sensory cortex and the sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) was recorded from the median nerve of 15 adult subjects whilst electrically stimulating the digital nerves of the index finger. Subjects performed the following tasks (a) a sustained abduction of the index finger against resistance at 10-20 % maximum voluntary contraction (MVC), and (b) abduction of the index finger as in (a) whilst performing self paced low amplitude tapping of the (i) index finger, (ii) thumb, (iii) middle finger, (iv) little finger and (v) ipsilateral foot. The E2 component of the CMR and the N20/P25 components of the SEP were significantly reduced during finger tapping (P < 0.05). This reduction was independent of which finger was tapping (P > 0.05). There was a significant (qualitative) relationship between the decrease in the size of the E2 component of the CMR and the N20/P25 components of the SEP ((2) test; P < 0.05). There were no significant changes in E1 and I1 (P > 0.05). The size of the SNAP was independent of task (P > 0.05). The size of the E1, I1, E2 components of the CMR, and the N20/P25 components of the SEP were unaltered during foot tapping (P > 0.05, n = 4). We conclude that the decrease in size of the E2 component associated with finger tapping results from gating of the digital nerve input.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207