A wireless spinal stimulation system for ventral activation of the rat cervical spinal cord
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrical stimulation of the cervical spinal cord is gaining traction as a therapy following spinal cord injury; however, it is difficult to target the cervical motor region in a rodent using a non-penetrating stimulus compared with direct placement of intraspinal wire electrodes. Penetrating wire electrodes have been explored in rodent and pig models and, while they have proven beneficial in the injured spinal cord, the negative aspects of spinal parenchymal penetration (e.g., gliosis, neural tissue damage, and obdurate inflammation) are of concern when considering therapeutic potential. We therefore designed a novel approach for epidural stimulation of the rat spinal cord using a wireless stimulation system and ventral electrode array. Our approach allowed for preservation of mobility following surgery and was suitable for long term stimulation strategies in awake, freely functioning animals. Further, electrophysiology mapping of the ventral spinal cord revealed the ventral approach was suitable to target muscle groups of the rat forelimb and, at a single electrode lead position, different stimulation protocols could be applied to achieve unique activation patterns of the muscles of the forelimb.
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) | 0.001 | 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".