MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2083244334 · doi:10.1152/jn.01049.2010

Robotic-assisted stepping modulates monosynaptic reflexes in forearm muscles in the human

2011· article· en· W2083244334 on OpenAlexaff
Tsuyoshi Nakajima, Taku Kitamura, Kiyotaka Kamibayashi, Tomoyoshi Komiyama, E. Paul Zehr, Sandra R. Hundza, Kimitaka Nakazawa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflexH-reflexForearmStimulationForelimbAfferentNeuroscienceRhythmStretch reflexSomatosensory systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAnatomyPsychologyMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the amplitude of the Hoffmann (H)-reflex in the forelimb muscles is known to be suppressed during rhythmic leg movement, it is unknown which factor plays a more important role in generating this suppression-movement-related afferent feedback or feedback related to body loading. To specifically explore the movement- and load-related afferent feedback, we investigated the modulation of the H-reflex in the flexor carpi radialis (FCR) muscle during robotic-assisted passive leg stepping. Passive stepping and standing were performed using a robotic gait-trainer system (Lokomat). The H-reflex in the FCR, elicited by electrical stimulation to the median nerve, was recorded at 10 different phases of the stepping cycle, as well as during quiet standing. We confirmed that the magnitude of the FCR H-reflex was suppressed significantly during passive stepping compared with during standing. The suppressive effect on the FCR H-reflex amplitude was seen at all phases of stepping, irrespective of whether the stepping was conducted with body weight loaded or unloaded. These results suggest that movement-related afferent feedback, rather than load-related afferent feedback, plays an important role in suppressing the FCR H-reflex amplitude.

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207