MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050364182 · doi:10.1002/mus.21338

Characterization of a novel C8 phasic muscle stretch reflex

2009· article· en· W2050364182 on OpenAlexaff
Steven K. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNerve Injury and Rehabilitation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThenar eminenceMedicineReflexAnatomyEpicondyleH-reflexCarpal tunnel syndromeWristAnesthesiaSurgeryElbow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muscle stretch reflexes (MSRs) are fundamental to the neurologic examination. Although the fifth, sixth, and seventh cervical roots have appropriate and easily elicited MSRs, the C8 level does not. The C8 reflex is obtained by tapping the thenar eminence, which produces flexion at the interphalyngeal joints of the fingers. To confirm that finger flexion represented an MSR, an externally triggered hammer-skin contact set-up was employed. Surface recording electrodes were placed at one third of the distance between the medial epicondyle and ulnar styloid. This montage produced distinct T-waves with latencies compatible with a reflex arc. Normative data were collected for 75 healthy subjects (150 arms), including 15 from each of five age groups (20-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, > or =60 years). Distance 1 (D1) was measured from the FPL to the C7 spinous process and distance 2 (D2) from C7 to the G1 electrode. A high median neuropathy abolished the T-wave. A distal median nerve block at the carpal tunnel had no effect. Mean latencies (+/- SD) from the respective age groups were as follows: 21.73 +/- 1.16 ms; 22.50 +/- 1.70 ms; 22.19 +/- 1.52 ms; 22.66 +/- 2.13 ms; and 23.97 +/- 1.91 ms. Reflex latencies significantly correlated with age (r = 0.33, P = 0.004), height (r = 0.51, P < 0.0001), and D1 + D2 or arc length (r = 0.74, P < 0.0001). This novel MSR is generated from the FPL tendon and stimulates contraction of the long finger flexors. It therefore represents a clinically useful C8 MSR.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.888
Threshold uncertainty score0.463

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.277 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicNerve Injury and RehabilitationFrench-language works237,207