MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084357882 · doi:10.1093/brain/awm245

Reaching training in rats with spinal cord injury promotes plasticity and task specific recovery

2007· article· en· W2084357882 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of LethbridgeMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleChristopher and Dana Reeve Foundation
KeywordsForelimbSpinal cord injuryMedicineCorticospinal tractNeuroplasticityPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPyramidal tractsSpinal cordStimulationNeurosciencePsychologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the current study we examined the effects of training in adult rats with a cervical spinal cord injury (SCI). One group of rats received 6 weeks of training in a single pellet reaching task immediately after injury, while a second group did not receive training. Following this period changes in cortical levels of BDNF and GAP-43 were analysed in trained and untrained animals and in a group with training but no injury. In another group of rats, functional recovery was analysed in the reaching task and when walking on a horizontal ladder. Thereupon, the cortical forelimb area was electrophysiologically examined using micro-stimulation followed by tracing of the lesioned corticospinal tract (CST). We found that trained rats improved substantially in the reaching task, when compared to their untrained counterparts. Trained rats however, performed significantly worse with their injured forelimb when walking on a horizontal ladder. In parallel to the improved recovery in the trained task, we found that the cortical area where wrist movements could be evoked by micro-stimulation expanded in trained rats in comparison to both untrained and uninjured rats. Furthermore, collateral sprouting of lesioned CST fibres rostral to the injury was increased in trained rats. Post-injury training was also found to increase cortical levels of GAP-43 but not BDNF. In conclusion we show that training of a reaching task promotes recovery of the trained task following partial SCI by enhancing plasticity at various levels of the central nervous system (CNS), but may come at the cost of an untrained task.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.860
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.299 · 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