Repetitive Intermittent Hypoxia Induces Respiratory and Somatic Motor Recovery after Chronic Cervical Spinal Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinal injury disrupts connections between the brain and spinal cord, causing life-long paralysis. Most spinal injuries are incomplete, leaving spared neural pathways to motor neurons that initiate and coordinate movement. One therapeutic strategy to induce functional motor recovery is to harness plasticity in these spared neural pathways. Chronic intermittent hypoxia (CIH) (72 episodes per night, 7 nights) increases synaptic strength in crossed spinal synaptic pathways to phrenic motoneurons below a C2 spinal hemisection. However, CIH also causes morbidity (e.g., high blood pressure, hippocampal apoptosis), rendering it unsuitable as a therapeutic approach to chronic spinal injury. Less severe protocols of repetitive acute intermittent hypoxia may elicit plasticity without associated morbidity. Here we demonstrate that daily acute intermittent hypoxia (dAIH; 10 episodes per day, 7 d) induces motor plasticity in respiratory and nonrespiratory motor behaviors without evidence for associated morbidity. dAIH induces plasticity in spared, spinal pathways to respiratory and nonrespiratory motor neurons, improving respiratory and nonrespiratory (forelimb) motor function in rats with chronic cervical injuries. Functional improvements were persistent and were mirrored by neurochemical changes in proteins that contribute to respiratory motor plasticity after intermittent hypoxia (BDNF and TrkB) within both respiratory and nonrespiratory motor nuclei. Collectively, these studies demonstrate that repetitive acute intermittent hypoxia may be an effective and non-invasive means of improving function in multiple motor systems after chronic spinal injury.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".