MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2969704097 · doi:10.1177/1179069519869615

Walking Function After Cervical Contusion and Distraction Spinal Cord Injuries in Rats

2019· article· en· W2969704097 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Experimental Neuroscience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsInternational Collaboration On Repair DiscoveriesUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMedicineDistractionSpinal cordSpinal cord injuryPhysical medicine and rehabilitationCervical vertebraeAnesthesiaSurgeryNeurosciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines and compares the walking function in contusion and distraction spinal cord injury (SCI) mechanisms. Moderate contusion and distraction SCIs were surgically induced between C5 and C6 in Sprague-Dawley male rats. The CatWalk system was used to perform gait analysis of walkway walking. The ladder rung walking test was used to quantify skilled locomotor movements of ladder rung walking. It was found that the inter-paw coordination, paw support, front paw kinematics, hind paw kinematics, and skilled movements were significantly different before and after contusion and distraction. Step sequence duration, diagonal support, forelimb intensity, forelimb duty cycle, forelimb paw angle, and forelimb swing speed were more greatly affected in distraction than in contusion at 2 weeks post-injury, whereas hindlimb stand was more greatly affected in contusion than in distraction at 8 weeks post-injury. After 8 weeks post-injury, diagonal coupling-variation, girdle coupling-variation, ipsilateral coupling-mean, forelimb maximum contact at, forelimb intensity, forelimb paw angle, and number of forelimb misplacements recovered to normal in contusion but not in distraction, whereas step sequence duration, ipsilateral coupling-variation, forelimb stand, forelimb duty cycle, hindlimb swing duration, hindlimb swing speed, and number of forelimb slips recovered to normal in distraction but not in contusion. Some of the behavioral outcomes, but not the others, were linearly correlated with the histological outcomes. In conclusion, walking deficits and recovery can be affected by the type of common traumatic 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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.284

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.351 · 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