MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035371860 · doi:10.3389/fncir.2020.00031

Insights Into Spinal Dorsal Horn Circuit Function and Dysfunction Using Optical Approaches

2020· review· en· W3035371860 on OpenAlexafffund
Erika K. Harding, Samuel W. Fung, Robert P. Bonin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neural Circuits · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCephalopods and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and DepressionBrain and Behavior Research Foundation
KeywordsNeuroscienceFrench hornDorsumSpinal cordFunction (biology)PsychologyBiologyAnatomyCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Somatosensation encompasses a variety of essential modalities including touch, pressure, proprioception, temperature, pain, and itch. These peripheral sensations are crucial for all types of behaviours, ranging from social interaction to danger avoidance. Somatosensory information is transmitted from primary afferent fibres in the periphery into the central nervous system via the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. The dorsal horn functions as an intermediary processing center for this information, comprising a complex network of excitatory and inhibitory interneurons as well as projection neurons which transmit the processed somatosensory information from the spinal cord to the brain. It is now known that there can be dysfunction within this spinal cord circuitry in pathological pain conditions, and that these perturbations contribute to the development and maintenance of pathological pain. However, the complex and heterogeneous network of the spinal dorsal horn has hampered efforts to further elucidate its role in somatosensory processing. Emerging optical techniques promise to illuminate the underlying organization and function of the dorsal horn and provide insights into the role of spinal cord sensory processing in shaping the behavioural response to somatosensory input that we ultimately observe. This review will focus on recent advances in optogenetic and fluorescence imaging techniques in the spinal cord, encompassing findings from both in-vivo and in-vitro preparations. We will also discuss the current limitations and difficulties of employing these techniques to interrogate the spinal cord and current practices and approaches to overcome these challenges.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations52
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Neural CircuitsSame topicCephalopods and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207