ReviewExperimental brain research2017
How plastic are human spinal cord motor circuitries?
Review in Experimental brain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Article
- Endurance Trained Athletes Do NotFrontiers in physiology · 2021Article
- Long-term motor skill training with individually adjusted progressive difficulty enhances learning and promotes corticospinal plasticity.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Maturation of the Locomotor Circuitry in Children With Cerebral Palsy.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- The negotiated equilibrium model of spinal cord function.The Journal of physiology · 2018Review
- Effects of motor cortex neuromodulation on the specificity of corticospinal tract spinal axon outgrowth and targeting in rats.Brain stimulationArticle
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Human and animal studies have documented that neural circuitries in the spinal cord show adaptive changes caused by altered supraspinal and/or afferent input to the spinal circuitry in relation to learning, immobilization, injury and neurorehabilitation. Reversible adaptations following, e.g. the acquisition or refinement of a motor skill rely heavily on the functional integration between supraspinal and sensory inputs to the spinal cord networks. Accordingly, what is frequently conceived as a change in the spinal circuitry may be a change in either descending or afferent input or in the relative integration of these, i.e. a change in the neuronal weighting. This is evident from findings documenting only task-specific functional changes after periods of altered inputs whereas resting responses remain unaffected. In fact, the proximity of the spinal circuitry to the outer world may demand a more rigid organization compared to the highly flexible cortical circuits. The understanding of all of this is important for the planning and execution of neurorehabilitation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
28776155What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.