MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154111363 · doi:10.1177/1545968310378753

Effects on Locomotion, Muscle, Bone, and Blood Induced by a Combination Therapy Eliciting Weight-Bearing Stepping in Nonassisted Spinal Cord–Transected Mice

2010· article· en· W2154111363 on OpenAlexaff
Pierre A. Guertin, Roth‐Visal Ung, Pascal Rouleau, Inge Steuer

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurorehabilitation and neural repair · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalNordic Life Science Pipeline (Canada)
FundersInternational Foundation for Research in Paraplegia
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryHindlimbRehabilitationSpinal cordCentral pattern generatorAnesthesiaTreadmillPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The health benefits associated with physical activity-based rehabilitation in patients with no lower-extremity motor function after a spinal cord injury (SCI) is uncertain. METHODS: The authors assessed signs of efficacy, safety, and utility associated with a novel pharmacological combination therapy to activate central pattern generator (CPG) activity and corresponding locomotor activity in complete thoracic Th9/10-transected mice. RESULTS: Subcutaneous administration 4 times per week for 1 month of 1.5 mg/kg buspirone, 1.5 mg/kg apomorphine, 12.5 mg/kg benserazide, and 50 mg/kg L-DOPA induced episodes of weight-bearing stepping on a treadmill in nonassisted paraplegic mice for 45-minute sessions. Hindlimb muscle cross-sectional area and fiber area values as well as several blood cell constituent levels assessed at 30 days postinjury were positively affected by the combination therapy, as compared with controls. Episodes of locomotion remained effective on each treatment. Femoral bone mineral density loss was not prevented by triple therapy. CONCLUSION: Although translation of these findings needs further experimentation, similar pharmacological activation of the CPG offers a novel therapeutic target to provide some health benefits in motor-complete SCI patients.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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

Citations27
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurorehabilitation and neural repairSame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207