A modified rehabilitation paradigm bilaterally increased rat extensor digitorum communis muscle size but did not improve forelimb function after stroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malnutrition after stroke may lessen the beneficial effects of rehabilitation on motor recovery through influences on both brain and skeletal muscle. Enriched rehabilitation (ER), a combination of environmental enrichment and forelimb reaching practice, is used preclinically to study recovery of skilled reaching after stroke. However, the chronic food restriction typically used to motivate engagement in reaching practice is a barrier to using ER to investigate interactions between nutritional status and rehabilitation. Thus, our objectives were to determine if a modified ER program comprised of environmental enrichment and skilled reaching practice motivated by a short fast would enhance post-stroke forelimb motor recovery and preserve forelimb muscle size and metabolic fiber type, relative to a group exposed to stroke without ER. At one week after photothrombotic cortical stroke, male, Sprague-Dawley rats were assigned to modified ER or standard care for 2 weeks. Forelimb recovery was assessed in the Montoya staircase and cylinder task before stroke and on days 5-6, 22-23, and 33-34 after stroke. ER failed to improve forelimb function in either task (p > 0.05). Atrophy of extensor digitorum communis (EDC) and triceps brachii long head (TBL) muscles was not evident in the stroke-targeted forelimb on day 35, but the area occupied by hybrid fibers was increased in the EDC muscle (p = 0.038). ER bilaterally increased EDC (p = 0.046), but not TBL, muscle size; EDC muscle fiber type was unchanged by ER. While the modified ER did not promote forelimb motor recovery, it does appear to have utility for studying the role of skeletal muscle plasticity in post-stroke recovery.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".