MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2602212655 · doi:10.1113/jp273935

Both standing and postural threat decrease Achilles’ tendon reflex inhibition from tendon electrical stimulation

2017· article· en· W2602212655 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian C. Horslen, J. Timothy Inglis, Jean‐Sébastien Blouin, Mark G. Carpenter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesVancouver Coastal HealthUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsReflexAchilles tendonStimulationBalance (ability)Physical medicine and rehabilitationTendonContext (archaeology)Ankle jerk reflexPhysical StimulationElectromyographyMedicinePsychologyAnatomyNeuroscienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: Golgi tendon organs (GTOs) and associated Ib reflexes contribute to standing balance, but the potential impacts of threats to standing balance on Ib reflexes are unknown. Tendon electrical stimulation to the Achilles' tendon was used to probe changes in Ib inhibition in medial gastrocnemius with postural orientation (lying prone vs. upright standing; experiment 1) and height-induced postural threat (standing at low and high surface heights; experiment 2). Ib inhibition was reduced while participants stood upright, compared to lying prone (42.2%); and further reduced when standing in the high, compared to low, threat condition (32.4%). These experiments will impact future research because they demonstrate that tendon electrical stimulation can be used to probe Ib reflexes in muscles engaged in standing balance. These results provide novel evidence that human short-latency GTO-Ib reflexes are dependent upon both task, as evidenced by changes with postural orientation, and context, such as height-induced postural threat during standing. ABSTRACT: Golgi tendon organ Ib reflexes are thought to contribute to standing balance control, but it is unknown if they are modulated when people are exposed to a postural threat. We used a novel application of tendon electrical stimulation (TStim) to elicit Ib inhibitory reflexes in the medial gastrocnemius, while actively engaged in upright standing balance, to examine (a) how Ib reflexes to TStim are influenced by upright stance, and (b) the effects of height-induced postural threat on Ib reflexes during standing. TStim evoked short-latency (<47 ms) inhibition apparent in trigger-averaged rectified EMG, which was quantified in terms of area, duration and mean amplitude of inhibition. In order to validate the use of TStim in a standing model, TStim-Ib inhibition was compared from conditions where participants were lying prone vs. standing upright. TStim evoked Ib inhibition in both conditions; however, significant reductions in Ib inhibition area (42.2%) and duration (32.9%) were observed during stance. Postural threat, manipulated by having participants stand at LOW (0.8 m high, 0.6 m from edge) and HIGH (3.2 m, at edge) elevated surfaces, significantly reduced Ib inhibition area (32.4%), duration (16.4%) and amplitude (24.8%) in the HIGH, compared to LOW, threat condition. These results demonstrate TStim is a viable technique for investigating Ib reflexes in standing, and confirm Ib reflexes are modulated with postural orientation. The novel observation of reduced Ib inhibition with elevated postural threat reveals that human Ib reflexes are context dependent, and the human Ib reflex pathways are modulated by threat or emotional processing centres of the CNS.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207