MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210660017 · doi:10.1161/str.53.suppl_1.tp253

Abstract TP253: Early Intense Rehabilitation Does Not Reduce Impairment After Intra-striatal Hemorrhagic Stroke In Rats

2022· article· en· W4210660017 on OpenAlexaff
Britt A. Fedor, Anna C. J. Kalisvaart, Shivani Ralhan, Tiffany F.C. Kung, Maxwell MacLaren, Frederick Colbourne

Bibliographic record

VenueStroke · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIntracerebral hemorrhageStroke (engine)HematomaNeurotoxicityInternal medicineAnesthesiaSurgeryToxicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) causes rapid mechanical damage and initiates secondary injury mechanisms, such as from toxic by-products of blood degradation, that cause extended cell death. Experimentally, several rehabilitative treatments (rehab) can mitigate late cell death, and one recent study suggests it is by accelerating hematoma clearance, thereby minimizing neurotoxicity. Here, we assessed whether early, intense, enriched rehab (ER) enhances functional benefit and reduces ICH injury. Methods: In experiment 1, rats (n=56) were randomly assigned to groups following collagenase-induced striatal ICH: ER-Dark, ER-Light, CONTROL-Dark, or CONTROL-Light. ER rats completed four reach training sessions and six hours of environmental enrichment daily for 10d (d5-14 after ICH), in either the dark or light phase of their housing cycle. Rats were euthanized on d14 and hematoma volume was assessed. In experiment 2 (n=72), rats were randomized to: ER-10, ER-20, or CONTROL. Using the same ER protocol, rats in ER-10 and ER-20 completed 10d (d5-14) or 20d (d5-14 and 19-28) of ER during the dark phase of their housing cycle. Rats were euthanized on d60, and brains were fixed for histological processing. In both experiments, rats completed behavioural assessments prior to ICH, pre-treatment (d4 post-ICH) and post treatment (experiment 1, d13-14; experiment 2, d16-17 and d30-31). Results: In experiment 1 there was no significant difference in reaching intensity between ER completed in light vs. dark (p=0.3318), and both groups reached extensively (3912±947 reaches). ER resulted in slightly better reaching success between d4 and d14 (p=0.0272) but did not significantly alter residual hematoma volume (p=0.9653). In experiment 2, ER duration did not significantly impact reaching success between d4 and d31 (p=0.0587) or reduce lesion size (p=0.6401). Conclusion: While similar rehab methods have been beneficial in other work, these findings suggest that slight variations in protocols (rehab initiation, intensity, time in enrichment) have a large impact on treatment efficacy. Additionally, these results underscore the importance of studying rehabilitation after ICH, as the use of comparable treatments appear to be far more efficacious for ischemic injury.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStrokeSame topicIntracerebral and Subarachnoid Hemorrhage ResearchFrench-language works237,207