The relative effects of tizanidine and baclofen on sensorimotor function in rats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
'Introduction'. Tizanidine, an (_2-noradrenergic/imidazoline agonist, and baclofen, a GABAb agonist, have been shown to have both antinociceptive and myorelaxant effects. In this study, the relative effect of tizanidine and baclofen on motor performance was tested at comparable analgesic dosages in rats. 'Methods'. Analgesia was measured using the tail-flick test and an analgesic index was calculated based on the cumulative increase in tail-flick latency. Motor performance was measured from kinematic analysis of swimming and a performance index was calculated based on the cumulative decrement in swim speed. Drugs, tizanidine and baclofen, were administered intraperitoneally following three baseline measurements at twenty minute intervals and subsequently monitored at regular twenty minute intervals for a period of two hours. Three comparable dosages were identified based on analgesia: low dose (0.5mg/kg tizanidine and 2.0 mg/kg baclofen), mid dose (1.5 mg/kg tizanidine and 5.0 mg/kg baclofen), and high dose(3.0 mg/kg tizanidine and 6.0 mg/kg baclofen. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)
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) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".