MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909099161 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0000000000006923

Ergogenic effects of an epidural neuroprosthesis in one individual with spinal cord injury

2019· article· en· W2909099161 on OpenAlexaff
Tom E. Nightingale, Matthias Walter, Alison M. M. Williams, Tania Lam, Andrei V. Krassioukov

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsGF Strong Rehabilitation CentreVancouver Coastal Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpinal cord injuryNeuroprostheticsMedicineNeuromodulationSpinal cordPhysical medicine and rehabilitationNeuroscienceStimulationInternal medicinePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individuals with a spinal cord injury (SCI) ≥T6 level exhibit impaired cardiovascular responses to exercise that can limit exercise capacity.1 The burgeoning field of neuromodulation has recently demonstrated that epidural spinal cord stimulation (ESCS), configured to facilitate motor function in humans with SCI, can also modulate cardiovascular function (i.e., increasing or maintaining arterial blood pressure at rest or in response to an orthostatic challenge, respectively).2–4 Here we present a unique application of ESCS to improve upper body exercise capacity in an individual with SCI, via the modulation of cardiovascular and respiratory 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.580

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.307 · 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

Citations31
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207