Effects of Vibration on Spasticity in Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate how whole-body vibration (WBV) or focal vibration (FV) would change spasticity in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). A search was conducted of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO electronic databases. A hand search was conducted of the bibliographies of articles and journals relevant to the research question. The inclusion criteria were three or more individuals, 17 yrs or older, with SCI who experience spasticity, and WBV or FV application. The evidence level of all ten identified studies (195 SCI subjects) was low on the basis of Centre for Evidence Based Medicine level of evidence. WBV (n = 1) and FV (n = 9) were applied to assess the effects of vibration on different measures of spasticity in individuals with SCI. FV application resulted in a short-term spasticity reduction lasting for a maximum of 24 hrs. Neurophysiologic measures showed H-reflex inhibition in individuals with SCI after FV application. WBV resulted in a decrease in spasticity lasting for 6-8 days after the last vibration session. WBV and FV might decrease spasticity for a short period, but no evidence-based recommendation can be drawn from the literature to guide rehabilitation medicine clinicians to manage spasticity with vibration application.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".