Evaluation of lumbar enlargement motor neuron excitability: Comparison between H-reflex and transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multisegmental muscle responses (MMR) are reflexes in the leg muscles evoked by transcutaneous electrical spinal cord stimulation over the Th11–Th12 vertebrae. We have used MMR to evaluate the excitability of lumbosacral motor neurons in individuals having paraplegia of low limbs. Ten individuals were tested using H-reflexes and MMR bilaterally before (n 0 = 20) and during 4-weeks course of rehabilitation (n=76). The H-reflex and MMR of m. gastrocnemius lateralis were obtained in: 15 and 13 cases out of 20, respectively. Both reflexes were recorded in 11 and were absent in 3 cases, matched up to 70% of recordings. In dynamic, the both methods were 100% reproducible and the responses’ amplitude varied in similar directions in 67% of records. The data confirm the validity and reproducibility of the MMR for evaluation of the motor neurons excitability in lumbosacral cord. The H-reflex magnitude shows moderate correlation with MMR in m. gastrocnemius lateralis (r = 0.59, p < 0.001), and weak correlation with MMR in mm. rectus femoris, biceps femoris, and tibialis anterior (r < 0.40, p < 0.001). These findings do not allow extrapolate the results from the H-reflex measurement on the state of lumbosacral cord on the whole. At the same time, measurements of the MMR allow estimate simultaneously the excitability of motor pools innervating several muscle groups. This gives the possibility to assess the functional state of the motor neurons in the lumbosacral cord for clinical and experimental studies, including the spinal cord damage.
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) | 0.000 | 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".