Motor imagery practice during arm-immobilization benefits sensorimotor cortical functions and plasticity-related sleep features
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Motor imagery (MI) is known to engage motor networks and could compensate for the maladaptive neuroplasticity elicited by immobilization. This hypothesis and associated underlying neural mechanisms remain underexplored. Here, we investigated how MI practice during 11 h of arm-immobilization influences sensorimotor and cortical representations of the hands, as well as sleep. Fourteen participants were first tested after a normal day, followed by two 11-h periods of immobilization, either with concomitant MI treatment or control tasks. Data revealed that MI prevented the consequences of immobilization: (i) alteration of the sensorimotor representation of hands, (ii) decrease of cortical excitability over the primary motor cortex (M1) contralateral to arm-immobilization, and (iii) reduction of sleep spindles over both M1s. Furthermore, (iv) the time spent in REM sleep was significantly longer after MI. These results support that implementing MI during immobilization can limit the deleterious effects of limb disuse, at several levels of sensorimotor functioning.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".