MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801263591 · doi:10.1161/strokeaha.118.020814

Synergistic Effects of Enriched Environment and Task-Specific Reach Training on Poststroke Recovery of Motor Function

2018· article· en· W2801263591 on OpenAlexafffund
Matthew S. Jeffers, Dale Corbett

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsImpactHeart and Stroke FoundationUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsMedicineRehabilitationStroke recoveryEnvironmental enrichmentStroke (engine)Physical medicine and rehabilitationGeneralizability theoryForelimbSpontaneous recoveryPhysical therapyAnesthesiaInternal medicinePsychologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Reach training in concert with environmental enrichment provides functional benefits after experimental stroke in rats. The present study extended these findings by assessing whether intensive task-specific reach training or enrichment initiated alone would provide similar functional benefit. Additionally, we investigated whether the 70% recovery rule, or a combined model of initial poststroke impairment, cortical infarct volume, and rehabilitation intensity, could predict recovery in the single-pellet task, as previously found for the Montoya staircase. METHODS: Rats were trained on single-pellet reaching before middle cerebral artery occlusion via intracerebral injection of ET-1 (endothelin-1). There were 4 experimental groups: stroke+enrichment, stroke+reaching, stroke+enrichment+reaching, and sham+enrichment+reaching. Reaching rehabilitation utilized a modified Whishaw box that encouraged impaired forelimb reaching for 6 hours per day, 5 days per week, for 4 weeks. All treatment paradigms began 7 days after ischemia with weekly assessment on the single-pellet task during rehabilitation and again 4 weeks after rehabilitation concluded. RESULTS: Rats exposed to the combination of enrichment and reaching showed the greatest improvement in pellet retrieval and comparable performance to shams after 3 weeks of treatment, whereas those groups that received a monotherapy remained significantly impaired at all time points. Initial impairment alone did not significantly predict recovery in single-pellet as the 70% rule would suggest; however, a combined model of cortical infarct volume and rehabilitation intensity predicted change in pellet retrieval on the single-pellet task with the same accuracy as previously shown with the staircase, demonstrating the generalizability of this model across reaching tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Task-specific reach training and environmental enrichment have synergistic effects in rats that persist long after rehabilitation ends, and this recovery is predicted by infarct volume and rehabilitation intensity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.502

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations62
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207