Prophylactic dietary restriction may promote functional recovery and increase lifespan after spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Functional recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI) is limited, and the injury results in a dramatic reduction in long-term lifespan. Prophylactic dietary restriction (DR) robustly extends animal lifespan, and is beneficial in models of neuronal insult. In rats, we found that one form of DR, every-other-day-fasting (EODF), which started 1 month prior to a cervical SCI improved functional recovery, resulted in greater numbers of neurons surrounding the injury site, and a approximately 45% reduction in lesion size compared to the control group. In the light of the low-risk implementation of prophylactic EODF, the clinical translation as a treatment prior to elective subacute or chronic interventions is attractive. There are numerous secondary complications after human SCI, including a 13- to 25-year reduction in lifespan. DR consistently increases median and maximal lifespan in a large range of organisms, including non-human primates. Animal research suggests that EODF might reduce many of the secondary complications people with SCI suffer from. Dietary interventions may provide the possibility to improve the quality and span of life for individuals with SCI.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".