Functional imaging of the rat cervical spinal cord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) of the rat cervical spinal cord using painful stimulation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: fMRI of the rat cervical spinal cord was performed at 9.4 T. Stimuli included injection of 25 microL of capsaicin (128 microg/mL in 7.5% dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO)) into the right dorsal forepaw and electrical stimulation (15 V, 0.3 msec, 3 Hz) of the left dorsal forepaw. RESULTS: Activation in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord, which is known to be associated with the transmission of pain, was found in all rats (N = 4) following injection of capsaicin into the dorsal forepaw. It was possible to reproduce the pain response in a given animal several times throughout the course of an experiment, provided that sufficient time was allowed between capsaicin injections. Regions of the spinal cord associated with motor and pain response were observed in functional imaging experiments involving subcutaneous electrical stimulation of the dorsal forepaw. CONCLUSION: Spinal fMRI using electrical stimulation and capsaicin-induced painful stimulation can be a useful tool in an animal model of pain and injury.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".