MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041989432 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2020.00260

Cortical Activation During Shoulder and Finger Movements in Healthy Adults: A Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (fNIRS) Study

2020· article· en· W3041989432 on OpenAlexafffund
Chieh-ling Yang, Shannon B. Lim, Sue Peters, Janice J. Eng

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaGF Strong Rehabilitation Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BCUniversity of British ColumbiaHeart and Stroke Foundation of Canada
KeywordsFunctional near-infrared spectroscopyNeurosciencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyMedicineAudiologyCognition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Characterization of cortical activation patterns during movement of the upper extremity in healthy adults is helpful in understanding recovery mechanisms following neurological disorders. This study explores cortical activation patterns associated with movements of the shoulder and fingers in healthy adults using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Twelve healthy right-handed participants were recruited. Two motor tasks (shoulder abduction and finger extension) with two different trial lengths (10 s and 20 s) were performed in a sitting position at a rate of 0.5 Hz. The hemodynamic response, as indicated by oxy-hemoglobin (HbO) and deoxy-hemoglobin (HbR), over both hemispheres was acquired using a 54-channel fNIRS system. We found a generalized bilateral cortical activation during both motor tasks with greater activation in the contralateral compared to the ipsilateral primary motor cortex. Particularly in the more medial part of the contralateral hemisphere, significant higher activation was found during the shoulder compared to finger movements. Furthermore, cortical activation patterns are affected not only by motor tasks but also by trial lengths. HbO is more sensitive to detect cortical activation during finger movements in longer trials, while HbR is a better surrogate to capture active areas during shoulder movement in shorter trials. Based on these findings, reporting both HbO and HbR is strongly recommended for future fNIRS studies, and trial lengths should be taken into account when designing experiments and explaining results. Our findings demonstrating distinct cortical activation patterns associated with shoulder and finger movements in healthy adults provide a foundation for future research to study recovery mechanisms following neurological disorders.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations29
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicOptical Imaging and Spectroscopy TechniquesFrench-language works237,207