MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010248043 · doi:10.1113/jp278890

Motor learning induces time‐dependent plasticity that is observable at the spinal cord level

2020· article· en· W3010248043 on OpenAlexaff
Louis‐Solal Giboin, Craig D. Tokuno, Andreas Krämer, Mélanie Henry, Markus Grüber

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Physiology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMotor learningSpinal cordTask (project management)Physical medicine and rehabilitationReflexPsychologyNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

KEY POINTS: The spinal cord is an important contributor to motor learning It remains unclear whether short-term spinal cord adaptations are general or task-specific Immediately after task acquisition, neural adaptations were not specific to the trained task (i.e. were general) Twenty-four hours after acquisition, neural adaptations appeared to be task-specific The neural reorganization and generalization of spinal adaptations appears to be time-dependent. ABSTRACT: Spinal cord plasticity is an important contributor of motor learning in humans, although its mechanisms are still poorly documented. In particular, it remains unclear whether short-term spinal adaptations are general or task-specific. As a marker of neural changes that are observable at spinal level, we measured the Hoffmann reflex (H-reflex) amplitude in the soleus muscle of 18 young healthy human adults before, immediately after (acquisition), and 24 h after (retention) the learning of a skilled task (i.e. one-legged stance on a tilt board). H-reflexes were elicited 46 ± 30 ms before touching the tilt board. Additionally, and at the same time points, we measured the H-reflex with the subject sitting at rest and when performing an unskilled and untrained task (i.e. one-legged stance on the floor). After task acquisition, there was a decrease of the H-reflex amplitude measured at rest but not during the skilled or the unskilled task. At retention, there was a decrease of the H-reflex when measured during the skilled task but not during the unskilled task or at rest. Performance increase was not associated with changes in the H-reflex amplitude. After the acquisition of a new skilled task, spinal changes appeared to be general (i.e. observable at rest). However, 24 h after, these changes were task-specific (i.e. observable only during performance of the trained task). These results imply that skill training induces a time-dependent reorganization of the modulation of spinal networks, which possibly reflects a time-dependent optimization of the feedforward motor command.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0030.000

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 head0.197
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations40
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PhysiologySame topicSpinal Cord Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207