MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904194210 · doi:10.3390/brainsci8120225

Alterations in Motor Cortical Representation of Muscles Following Incomplete Spinal Cord Injury in Humans

2018· article· en· W2904194210 on OpenAlexafffund
Hunter J. Fassett, Claudia V. Turco, Jenin El‐Sayes, Aimee J. Nelson

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTranscranial magnetic stimulationSpinal cord injuryBicepsPrimary motor cortexMotor cortexPhysical medicine and rehabilitationMedicineSpinal cordNeuroscienceHand musclesRehabilitationAnatomyPsychologyStimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(1) Background: The primary motor cortex (M1) experiences reorganization following spinal cord injury (SCI). However, there is a paucity of research comparing bilateral M1 organization in SCI and questions remain to be answered. We explored the presence of somatotopy within the M1 representation of arm muscles, and determined whether anatomical shifts in these representations occur, and investigated the symmetry in organization between the two hemispheres.; (2) Methods: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) was used to map the representation of the biceps, flexor carpi radialis and abductor pollicis brevis (APB) bilaterally in nine individuals with chronic incomplete cervical spinal cord injury and nine aged- and handed-matched uninjured controls. TMS was delivered over a 6 × 5 point grid that encompassed M1 using an intensity specific to the resting motor threshold for each muscle tested.; (3) Results: Results indicate that, compared to controls, muscle representations in SCI are shifted medially but preserve a general somatotopic arrangement, and that territory dedicated to the APB muscle is greater.; (4) Conclusions: These findings demonstrate differences in the organization of M1 between able-bodied controls and those with incomplete cervical SCI. This altered organization may have future implications in understanding the functional deficits observed in SCI and rehabilitation techniques aimed at restoring function.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.351

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.135
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrain SciencesSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207