A randomized trial of functional electrical stimulation for walking in incomplete spinal cord injury: Effects on walking competency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multi-channel surface functional electrical stimulation (FES) for walking has been used to improve voluntary walking and balance in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). OBJECTIVE: To investigate short- and long-term benefits of 16 weeks of thrice-weekly FES-assisted walking program, while ambulating on a body weight support treadmill and harness system, versus a non-FES exercise program, on improvements in gait and balance in individuals with chronic incomplete traumatic SCI, in a randomized controlled trial design. METHODS: Individuals with traumatic and chronic (≥18 months) motor incomplete SCI (level C2 to T12, American Spinal Cord Injury Association Impairment Scale C or D) were recruited from an outpatient SCI rehabilitation hospital, and randomized to FES-assisted walking therapy (intervention group) or aerobic and resistance training program (control group). Outcomes were assessed at baseline, and after 4, 6, and 12 months. Gait, balance, spasticity, and functional measures were collected. RESULTS: Spinal cord independence measure (SCIM) mobility sub-score improved over time in the intervention group compared with the control group (baseline/12 months: 17.27/21.33 vs. 19.09/17.36, respectively). On all other outcome measures the intervention and control groups had similar improvements. Irrespective of group allocation walking speed, endurance, and balance during ambulation all improved upon completion of therapy, and majority of participants retained these gains at long-term follow-ups. CONCLUSIONS: Task-oriented training improves walking ability in individuals with incomplete SCI, even in the chronic stage. Further randomized controlled trials, involving a large number of participants are needed, to verify if FES-assisted treadmill training is superior to aerobic and strength training.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".