Effect of transcranial electrical stimulation (TES) on the First Flexion Angle and Abductor Hallucis H-reflex in a person with T4-motor-complete spinal cord injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY PURPOSE: Spasticity after a spinal cord injury (SCI) is common and can hinder completion of daily tasks. This case study examines the reduction in hypertonus in a person with T4-motor- complete-SCI using a commercial transcutaneous electrical stimulator (TES) at 150-Hz applied to the lower back and the possible mechanisms producing this reduction in leg tone. DATA COLLECTED: Hypertonus of both lower legs before and during lumbosacral TES applied over the spinal column (MID) or 10-cm lateral (LAT) was measured with the pendulum test. To estimate how proprioceptive afferents and spinal neuronal networks were affected by lumbosacral TES, H-reflexes and cutaneomuscular reflexes, respectively, were also measured. Hypertonus disappeared in both legs but only during lumbosacral TES. During the pendulum test, MID TES increased the excursion of both lower legs after release from a horizontal position by an average of 63.3% that was similar to the increase produced by LAT TES (47.8%). Both locations of lumbosacral TES increased H-reflexes but decreased the first polysynaptic response of the cutaneomuscular reflex. DATA USAGE NOTES:
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.005 |
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".