Neurophysiological Characterization of a Non-Human Primate Model of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury Utilizing Fine-Wire EMG Electrodes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to characterize traumatic spinal cord injury (TSCI) neurophysiologically using an intramuscular fine-wire electromyography (EMG) electrode pair. EMG data were collected from an agonist-antagonist pair of tail muscles of Macaca fasicularis, pre- and post-lesion, and for a treatment and control group. The EMG signals were decomposed into multi-resolution subsets using wavelet transforms (WT), then the relative power (RP) was calculated for each individual reconstructed EMG sub-band. Linear mixed models were developed to test three hypotheses: (i) asymmetrical volitional activity of left and right side tail muscles (ii) the effect of the experimental TSCI on the frequency content of the EMG signal, (iii) and the effect of an experimental treatment. The results from the electrode pair data suggested that there is asymmetry in the EMG response of the left and right side muscles (p-value < 0.001). This is consistent with the construct of limb dominance. The results also suggest that the lesion resulted in clear changes in the EMG frequency distribution in the post-lesion period with a significant increment in the low-frequency sub-bands (D4, D6, and A6) of the left and right side, also a significant reduction in the high-frequency sub-bands (D1 and D2) of the right side (p-value < 0.001). The preliminary results suggest that using the RP of the EMG data, the fine-wire intramuscular EMG electrode pair are a suitable method of monitoring and measuring treatment effects of experimental treatments for spinal cord injury (SCI).
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".