Neuroplasticity and regeneration after spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a debilitating condition with significant personal, societal, and economic burden. The highest proportion of traumatic injuries occur at the cervical level, which results in severe sensorimotor and autonomic deficits. Following the initial physical damage associated with traumatic injuries, secondary pro-inflammatory, excitotoxic, and ischemic cascades are initiated further contributing to neuronal and glial cell death. Additionally, emerging evidence has begun to reveal that spinal interneurons undergo subtype specific neuroplastic circuit rearrangements in the weeks to months following SCI, contributing to or hindering functional recovery. The current therapeutic guidelines and standards of care for SCI patients include early surgery, hemodynamic regulation, and rehabilitation. Additionally, preclinical work and ongoing clinical trials have begun exploring neuroregenerative strategies utilizing endogenous neural stem/progenitor cells, stem cell transplantation, combinatorial approaches, and direct cell reprogramming. This review will focus on emerging cellular and noncellular regenerative therapies with an overview of the current available strategies, the role of interneurons in plasticity, and the exciting research avenues enhancing tissue repair following SCI.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".