Relationship between soleus H-reflex asymmetry and postural control in multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Impaired postural control is a common symptom in people with multiple sclerosis. Multiple sclerosis frequently presents with asymmetric motor involvement. One measurement yet to be evaluated for asymmetry in people with multiple sclerosis is the soleus Hoffmann reflex. Purpose To measure the soleus Hoffmann reflex between limbs and correlate reflex asymmetry with postural control.Material and methods 16 participants completed four sessions of Hoffmann reflex testing and one session of balance testing.Results Multiple sclerosis participants had significantly greater reflex asymmetry (p = 0.01). The multiple sclerosis group had a significantly lower overall sensory organization testing composite score (p < 0.05), indicating sensory interpretation conflict that resulted in greater postural instability. Multiple sclerosis participants produced a significantly shorter endpoint and maximum excursion (p < 0.01) during limits of stability testing. Hoffmann reflex asymmetry was negatively related to forward endpoint excursion (p < 0.05), maximum excursion (p ≤ 0.01).Conclusions Multiple sclerosis participants had greater soleus Hoffmann reflex asymmetry, which appears to significantly influence forward postural control.Implications for rehabilitationSoleus Hoffmann reflex asymmetry appears to influence postural stability.The soleus Hoffmann reflex is capable of adapting to different modes of exercise; therefore, to reduce H-reflex asymmetry it is recommended to individualize physical rehabilitative programming.Assessing the soleus Hoffmann reflex in people with multiple sclerosis during health screenings could be of use to clinical and rehabilitative practitioners.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".