Spontaneous behavioural recovery following stroke relates to the integrity of sensory and association cortices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Stroke is a devastating disease that results in neurological deficits and represents a leading cause of death and disability worldwide. Following a stroke, there is a degree of spontaneous recovery of function, the neural basis of which is of great interest among clinicians in their efforts to reduce disability following stroke and enhance rehabilitation. Conventionally, work on spontaneous recovery has tended to focus on the neural reorganization of motor cortical regions, with comparably little attention being paid to changes in non-motor regions and how these relate to recovery. Here we show, using structural neuroimaging in a macaque stroke model and by exploiting individual differences in spontaneous behavioural recovery, that the preservation of regions in the sensory and association cortices predict animal recovery. To characterize recovery, we performed a clustering analysis using Non-Human Primate Stroke Scale (NHPSS) scores and identified a good versus poor recovery group. By comparing the preservation of brain volumes in the two groups, we found that brain areas in integrity of brain areas in parietal, temporal and somatosensory cortex were associated with better recovery. In addition, a decoding approach performed across all subjects revealed that the preservation of specific brain regions in the parietal, somatosensory and medial frontal cortex predicted recovery. Together, these findings highlight the importance of the sensory and association regions in spontaneous behavioural recovery, supporting the notion that the ‘sensory retraining’ of impairments following stroke is critical to recovery and motor function.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".