MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2922947702 · doi:10.1002/hbm.24574

Proprioception and motor performance after stroke: An examination of diffusion properties in sensory and motor pathways

2019· article· en· W2922947702 on OpenAlexafffund
Sonja E. Findlater, Erin L. Mazerolle, G. Bruce Pike, Sean P. Dukelow

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Brain Mapping · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProprioceptionPostcentral gyrusCorticospinal tractPsychologySupramarginal gyrusSensory systemPhysical medicine and rehabilitationGyrusNeuroscienceDiffusion MRIPyramidal tractsMedicineSomatosensory systemMagnetic resonance imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proprioceptive and motor impairments commonly occur after stroke. Relationships between corticospinal tract (CST) fractional anisotropy (FA) and motor recovery have been identified. However, the relationship between sensory tract microstructure and proprioceptive recovery remains unexplored. Using probabilistic tractography, we examined the relationship between diffusion metrics in three tracts known to contain proprioceptive information (a) dorsal-column medial-lemniscal (DCML), (b) postcentral gyrus to supramarginal gyrus (POCG-SMG), (c) postcentral gyrus to Heschl's gyrus (POCG-HG) and proprioception at 1 (n = 26) and 6 months (n = 19) poststroke. Proprioception was assessed using two robotic tasks. Motor performance was also assessed robotically and compared to CST diffusion metrics. At 1-month poststroke, a nonsignificant relationship (r = -0.43, p = 0.05) was observed between DCML-FA and proprioceptive impairment. A moderate relationship was identified between POCG-SMG FA and POCG-HG FA and proprioceptive impairment (r = -0.47, p = 0.001 and r = -0.51, p = 0.008, respectively). No relationships were significant at 6 months poststroke. Similar to previous studies, lower CST-FA correlated with motor impairment at 1 month poststroke (r = -0.58, p = 0.002). While CST-FA is considered a predictor of motor impairment, our findings suggest that the relationship between FA and tracts containing proprioceptive information is not as straightforward and highlights the importance of sensory association areas in proprioception.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.938
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Brain MappingSame topicAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207