MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958646144 · doi:10.14814/phy2.14179

Modulation of the Hoffmann reflex in the tibialis anterior with a change in posture

2019· article· en· W2958646144 on OpenAlexaff
Janelle Unger, Justin W. Andrushko, Alison Oates, Doug W. Renshaw, Trevor S. Barss, E. Paul Zehr, Jonathan P. Farthing

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsH-reflexReflexSittingSoleus muscleFacilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTibialis anterior muscleMedicineAfferentAnkle jerk reflexBalance (ability)Leg musclePsychologyAnatomyPhysical therapyInternal medicineNeuroscienceSkeletal musclePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hoffmann (H-) reflex amplitudes in plantar flexor soleus muscle are modulated by posture, yet dorsiflexor tibialis anterior (TA) H-reflex parameters have sparingly been studied. The purpose was to investigate modulation of the TA H-reflex when postural demands are increased from sitting to standing. In this study, data from 18 participants (Age: 25 ± 4 years, Height: 170.9 ± 9.5 cm, Weight: 75.9 ± 17.2 kg) allowed comparison of two experimental conditions involving different postures (i.e. sitting and standing). Maximal amplitude of the TA H-reflex (Hmax) as a percent of the maximal M-wave amplitude (Mmax) (Hmax (% Mmax)) during sitting and standing was compared using ANOVA. Modulation of TA H-reflex amplitude was found: Eleven participants showed facilitation and seven showed no change of reflex amplitudes. Only participants in the facilitation group showed modulation related to changes in posture (sitting: 8.7 ± 2.9%; standing: 14.8 ± 6.7%, P = 0.005). These data provide evidence of the sensitivity to posture of TA H-reflexes. As with task-dependent changes in soleus H-reflexes, presynaptic regulation of Ia afferent transmission is a possible mechanism. Further investigations into causes of modulation are warranted.

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 score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReportsSame topicTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207