MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379055212 · doi:10.1016/j.neurom.2023.04.475

Safety and Feasibility of Cervical and Thoracic Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation to Improve Hand Motor Function in Children With Chronic Spinal Cord Injury

2023· article· en· W4379055212 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuromodulation Technology at the Neural Interface · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpinal Cord Injury Research
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalUniversity of AlbertaAlberta Health Services
FundersMinistry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian FederationUniversity of LouisvilleKosair Charities
KeywordsMedicineSpinal cord injuryAutonomic dysreflexiaSpinal cordAnesthesiaPhysical medicine and rehabilitationStimulationRehabilitationPopulationPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: In adults with cervical spinal cord injury (SCI), transcutaneous spinal stimulation (scTS) has improved upper extremity strength and control. This novel noninvasive neurotherapeutic approach combined with training may modulate the inherent developmental plasticity of children with SCI, providing even greater improvements than training or stimulation alone. Because children with SCI represent a vulnerable population, we first must establish the safety and feasibility of any potential novel therapeutic approach. The objectives of this pilot study were to determine the safety, feasibility, and proof of principle of cervical and thoracic scTS for short-term effect on upper extremity strength in children with SCI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this nonrandomized, within-subject repeated measure design, seven participants with chronic cervical SCI performed upper extremity motor tasks without and with cervical (C3-C4 and C6-C7) and thoracic (T10-T11) site scTS. Safety and feasibility of using cervical and thoracic sites scTS were determined by the frequency count of anticipated and unanticipated risks (eg, pain, numbness). Proof-of-principle concept was tested via change in force production during hand motor tasks. RESULTS: All seven participants tolerated cervical and thoracic scTS across the three days, with a wide range of stimulation intensities (cervical sites = 20-70 mA and thoracic site = 25-190 mA). Skin redness at the stimulation sites was observed in four of 21 assessments (19%) and dissipated in a few hours. No episode of autonomic dysreflexia was observed or reported. Hemodynamic parameters (systolic blood pressure and heart rate) remained within stable limits (p > 0.05) throughout the assessment time points at baseline, with scTS, and after the experiment. Hand-grip and wrist-extension strength increased (p < 0.05) with scTS. CONCLUSIONS: We indicated that short-term application of scTS via two cervical and one thoracic site is safe and feasible in children with SCI and resulted in immediate improvements in hand-grip and wrist-extension strength in the presence of scTS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT04032990.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.735
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.339 · 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