Continuous Descending Modulation of the Spinal Cord Revealed by Functional MRI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spontaneous variations in spinal cord activity may arise from regulation of any of a number of functions including sensory, motor, and autonomic control. Here, we use functional MRI (fMRI) of healthy participants to identify properties of blood oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) variations in the spinal cord in response to knowledge that either a noxious stimulus is impending, or that no stimulus is to be expected. Expectation of a noxious stimulus, or no stimulus, is shown to have a significant effect on wide-spread BOLD signal variations in the spinal cord over the entire time period of the fMRI acquisition. Coordination of BOLD responses between/within spinal cord and brainstem regions are also influenced by this knowledge. We provide evidence that such signal variations are the result of continuous descending modulation of spinal cord function. BOLD signal variations in response to noxious stimulation of the hand are also shown, as in previous studies. The observation of both continuous and reactive BOLD responses to emotional/cognitive factors and noxious peripheral stimulation may have important implications, not only for our understanding of endogenous pain modulation, but also in showing that spinal cord activity is under continuous regulatory control.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".