MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297147393 · doi:10.3390/biom12101355

Functional Gait Assessment Using Manual, Semi-Automated and Deep Learning Approaches Following Standardized Models of Peripheral Nerve Injury in Mice

2022· article· en· W4297147393 on OpenAlex
Daniel Umansky, Kathleen M. Hagen, Tak‐Ho Chu, Rajesh Krishna Pathiyil, Saud Alzahrani, Shalina S. Ousman, Rajiv Midha

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomolecules · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersUniversity of Calgary
KeywordsCrush injuryMedicineGaitGait analysisSciatic nervePhysical medicine and rehabilitationSurgeryAnatomyAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: To develop a standardized model of stretch−crush sciatic nerve injury in mice, and to compare outcomes of crush and novel stretch−crush injuries using standard manual gait and sensory assays, and compare them to both semi-automated as well as deep-learning gait analysis methods. Methods: Initial studies in C57/Bl6 mice were used to develop crush and stretch−crush injury models followed by histologic analysis. In total, 12 eight-week-old 129S6/SvEvTac mice were used in a six-week behavioural study. Behavioral assessments using the von Frey monofilament test and gait analysis recorded on a DigiGait platform and analyzed through both Visual Gait Lab (VGL) deep learning and standardized sciatic functional index (SFI) measurements were evaluated weekly. At the termination of the study, neurophysiological nerve conduction velocities were recorded, calf muscle weight ratios measured and histological analyses performed. Results: Histological evidence confirmed more severe histomorphological injury in the stretch−crush injured group compared to the crush-only injured group at one week post-injury. Von Frey monofilament paw withdrawal was significant for both groups at week one compared to baseline (p < 0.05), but not between groups with return to baseline at week five. SFI showed hindered gait at week one and two for both groups, compared to baseline (p < 0.0001), with return to baseline at week five. Hind stance width (HSW) showed similar trends as von Frey monofilament test as well as SFI measurements, yet hind paw angle (HPA) peaked at week two. Nerve conduction velocity (NCV), measured six weeks post-injury, at the termination of the study, did not show any significant difference between the two groups; yet, calf muscle weight measurements were significantly different between the two, with the stretch−crush group demonstrating a lower (poorer) weight ratio relative to uninjured contralateral legs (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Stretch−crush injury achieved a more reproducible and constant injury compared to crush-only injuries, with at least a Sunderland grade 3 injury (perineurial interruption) in histological samples one week post-injury in the former. However, serial behavioral outcomes were comparable between the two crush groups, with similar kinetics of recovery by von Frey testing, SFI and certain VGL parameters, the latter reported for the first time in rodent peripheral nerve injury. Semi-automated and deep learning-based approaches for gait analysis are promising, but require further validation for evaluation in murine hind-limb nerve injuries.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.552

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.251 · 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