MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415933662 · doi:10.1109/tnsre.2025.3628192

Improved Sensation With Transcutaneous Spinal Cord Stimulation Following Chronic Spinal Cord Injury

2025· article· en· W4415933662 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica M. D’Amico, Kristen Gelenitis, Fatma İnanıcı, Edelle C. Field‐Fote, Candace Tefertiller, Chet T. Moritz

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Management and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensationSpinal cord injuryPain sensationRehabilitationSensory systemSpinal cord stimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Following spinal cord injury (SCI), recovery of sensation is often neglected despite its critical roles in motor task execution and injury prevention. The Up-LIFT trial recently found targeted transcutaneous spinal cord stimulation (tSCS) combined with rehabilitation significantly improved sensation in addition to upper extremity (UE) strength and function. Here, we explore the clinical and functional significance of these sensory improvements. METHODS: Sixty participants with chronic, incomplete cervical SCI completed a two-month rehabilitation run-in phase followed by two months of tSCS + rehabilitation. At baseline and following each month of therapy, sensation was assessed using the sensory components of the International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI) exam and the Graded Redefined Assessment of Strength, Sensibility, and Prehension (GRASSP). The magnitude, distribution, and meaningfulness of changes in sensory metrics were analyzed. Stepwise linear regression models assessed the relative strengths of relationships between sensation and/or motor abilities with functional outcomes. RESULTS: Following combined tSCS+rehabilitation, ISNCSCI-Upper Extremity light touch and pin prick scores significantly improved (all p $\le 0.01$ ) with more than 50% of individuals with initial sensory deficits in upper extremity dermatomes demonstrating improvements following tSCS+rehabilitation. Notably, 53% of participants gained new upper extremity sensation following tSCS intervention. In line with these findings, GRASSP palmar sensibility improved across all three fingertip locations (p = 0.006), with both ISNCSCI and GRASSP assessments revealing that the largest improvements occurred at the C8 dermatome. ISNCSCI UE sensory scores correlated moderately with functional assessments (Capabilities of Upper Extremity Test (CUE-T) $\rho =0.57$ ; GRASSP Prehension Performance $\rho =0.51$ ), with stepwise regression models revealing that the inclusion of UE sensation alongside UE motor scores provided better prediction of both functional assessment scores compared to motor scores alone. No improvements were noted following rehabilitation alone. CONCLUSIONS: tSCS + rehabilitation induced widespread and clinically meaningful improvements in sensation across multiple dermatomes. These sensory improvements, together with improved strength, are important for conferring functional gains.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation EngineeringSame topicPain Management and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207