Increased Sensorimotor Cortex Activation With Decreased Motor Performance During Functional Upper Extremity Tasks Poststroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Current literature has focused on identifying neuroplastic changes associated with stroke through tasks and in positions that are not representative of functional rehabilitation. Emerging technologies such as functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) provide new methods of expanding the area of neuroplasticity within rehabilitation. This study determined the differences in sensorimotor cortex activation during unrestrained reaching and gripping after stroke. METHODS: Eleven individuals with chronic stroke and 11 neurologically healthy individuals completed reaching and gripping tasks under 3 conditions using their (1) stronger, (2) weaker, and (3) both arms together. Performance and sensorimotor cortex activation using fNIRS were collected. Group and arm differences were calculated using mixed analysis of covariance (covariate: age). Pairwise comparisons were used for post hoc analyses. Partial Pearson correlations between performance and activation were assessed for each task, group, and hemisphere. RESULTS: Larger sensorimotor activations in the ipsilesional hemisphere were found for the stroke compared with healthy group for reaching and gripping conditions despite poorer performance. Significant correlations were observed between gripping performance (with the weaker arm and both arms simultaneously) and sensorimotor activation for the stroke group only. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Stroke leads to significantly larger sensorimotor activation during functional reaching and gripping despite poorer performance. This may indicate an increased sense of effort, decreased efficiency, or increased difficulty after stroke. fNIRS can be used for assessing differences in brain activation during movements in functional positions after stroke. This can be a promising tool for investigating possible neuroplastic changes associated with functional rehabilitation interventions in the stroke population.Video Abstract available for more insights from the authors (see Video Abstract, Supplemental Digital Content 1, available at: http://links.lww.com/JNPT/A269).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".