MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098995517 · doi:10.1152/jn.00970.2004

Reduced Functional Recovery by Delaying Motor Training After Spinal Cord Injury

2005· article· en· W2098995517 on OpenAlexaff
Bryan Norrie, Jennifer Nevett-Duchcherer, Monica A. Gorassini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurophysiology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinal cordSpinal cord injuryLesionCorticospinal tractPhysical medicine and rehabilitationHindlimbPsychologyDorsumForelimbMedicineNeuroscienceAnatomySurgeryMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to examine if a delay in rehabilitative motor training after spinal cord injury affects functional motor recovery. We studied a skilled motor task in which rats traversed a raised horizontal ladder and we quantified errors in accurate stepping, i.e., foot slips between rungs. After lesions to the dorsal quadrant of the thoracic (T8) spinal cord that aimed to unilaterally sever the corticospinal and rubrospinal tracts, rats were re-trained to walk across the ladder, either immediately after injury or after a 3-mo delay. Before training, the error rate in accurate stepping of the affected hindlimb was similar in the immediately (69.4 +/- 5.3%) and delay (62.7 +/- 4.1%; means +/- SE)-trained animals (not significantly different), suggesting that accurate stepping did not improve spontaneously if rats were not exposed to the ladder. After a 3-wk course of training (30 runs across the ladder per day, 5 day/wk), improvements in accurate stepping performance were greater if training was implemented immediately after injury. On average, immediately trained animals improved stepping performance by 61.5 +/- 28.2%, whereas the delay trained group improved by only 34.9 +/- 28.8% (significantly different). The degree of damage to the corticospinal and rubrospinal tracts was very similar in the two groups of animals, indicating that differences in lesion size did not contribute to the differences in performance improvement. Animals with large lesions to the corticospinal and rubrospinal tracts (>70%) displayed poor recovery from training (especially for delay-trained animals), suggesting that these two pathways were important in mediating improvements in accurate stepping. In addition, recovery of stepping-like reflexes appeared not to contribute to the recovery of accurate stepping given that the time course of reflex recovery was not related to the time course of recovery of accurate stepping. We conclude that training of a skilled motor task that relies on descending control is more beneficial when initiated immediately after a partial spinal cord 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 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 score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.634

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.296 · 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

Citations90
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurophysiologySame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207