MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2891525441 · doi:10.1113/jp276459

Increased human stretch reflex dynamic sensitivity with height‐induced postural threat

2018· article· en· W2891525441 on OpenAlexafffund
Brian C. Horslen, Martin Zaback, J. Timothy Inglis, Jean‐Sébastien Blouin, Mark G. Carpenter

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesVancouver Coastal HealthUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsReflexStretch reflexMuscle spindlePhysical medicine and rehabilitationBalance (ability)Dynamic balanceElectromyographyLatency (audio)AmplitudePhysicsNeurosciencePsychologyMedicineComputer scienceAfferentClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: Threats to standing balance (postural threat) are known to facilitate soleus tendon-tap reflexes, yet the mechanisms driving reflex changes are unknown. Scaling of ramp-and-hold dorsiflexion stretch reflexes to stretch velocity and amplitude were examined as indirect measures of changes to muscle spindle dynamic and static function with height-induced postural threat. Overall, stretch reflexes were larger with threat. Furthermore, the slope (gain) of the stretch-velocity vs. short-latency reflex amplitude relationship was increased with threat. These findings are interpreted as indirect evidence for increased muscle spindle dynamic sensitivity, independent of changes in background muscle activity levels, with a threat to standing balance. We argue that context-dependent scaling of stretch reflexes forms part of a multisensory tuning process where acquisition and/or processing of balance-relevant sensory information is continuously primed to facilitate feedback control of standing balance in challenging balance scenarios. ABSTRACT: Postural threat increases soleus tendon-tap (t-) reflexes. However, it is not known whether t-reflex changes are a result of central modulation, altered muscle spindle dynamic sensitivity or combined spindle static and dynamic sensitization. Ramp-and-hold dorsiflexion stretches of varying velocities and amplitudes were used to examine velocity- and amplitude-dependent scaling of short- (SLR) and medium-latency (MLR) stretch reflexes as an indirect indicator of spindle sensitivity. t-reflexes were also performed to replicate previous work. In the present study, we examined the effects of postural threat on SLR, MLR and t-reflex amplitude, as well as SLR-stretch velocity scaling. Forty young-healthy adults stood with one foot on a servo-controlled tilting platform and the other on a stable surface. The platform was positioned on a hydraulic lift. Threat was manipulated by having participants stand in low (height 1.1 m; away from edge) then high (height 3.5 m; at the edge) threat conditions. Soleus stretch reflexes were recorded with surface electromyography and SLRs and MLRs were probed with fixed-amplitude variable-velocity stretches. t-reflexes were evoked with Achilles tendon taps using a linear motor. SLR, MLR and t-reflexes were 11%, 9.5% and 16.9% larger, respectively, in the high compared to low threat condition. In 22 out of 40 participants, SLR amplitude was correlated to stretch velocity at both threat levels. In these participants, the gain of the SLR-velocity relationship was increased by 36.1% with high postural threat. These findings provide new supportive evidence for increased muscle spindle dynamic sensitivity with postural threat and provide further support for the context-dependent modulation of human somatosensory pathways.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.348 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations39
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Physiology→Same topicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention→French-language works237,207→