Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29988534›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in physiology2018

Spinal Control of Locomotion: Individual Neurons, Their Circuits and Functions.

Marie-Pascale Côté, Lynda M Murray, Maria Knikou

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in physiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04807764 (Priming With High-Frequency Trans-spinal Stimulation to Augment Locomotor Benefits in Spinal Cord Injury), which is not on this map. Cited by 81 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing papers in PubMed
5.8field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT04807764 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2021, after this paper: background citation

Priming With High-Frequency Trans-spinal Stimulation to Augment Locomotor Benefits in Spinal Cord Injury

TypeinterventionalSponsorCity University of New YorkRan2021 to 2024Enrolled14ConditionsSpinal Cord Injuries, Paraplegia, Spinal, Tetraplegia/Tetraparesis, Paraplegia, SpasticArmsStanding transspinal stimulation followed by robotic gait training, Lying transspinal stimulation followed by robotic gait training, Standing sham transspinal stimulation followed by robotic gait training
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

81 citing papers in PubMed, 147 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Food science & nutrition · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Marie-Pascale CôtéCÔTÉ Lab, Spinal Cord Research Center, Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, Drexel University College of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Lynda M MurrayMotor Control and NeuroRecovery Research Laboratory (Klab4Recovery), Department of Physical Therapy, College of Staten Island, City University of New York, New York, NY, United States.
Maria KnikouMotor Control and NeuroRecovery Research Laboratory (Klab4Recovery), Department of Physical Therapy, College of Staten Island, City University of New York, New York, NY, United States.
College of Staten Island · USDrexel University · US

Funding

Chloride homeostasis and motor recovery after SCIR01NS083666 · NINDS · DREXEL UNIVERSITY · PI COTE, MARIE-PASCALE · 2015 to 2019
$1.6M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS083666
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Systematic research on the physiological and anatomical characteristics of spinal cord interneurons along with their functional output has evolved for more than one century. Despite significant progress in our understanding of these networks and their role in generating and modulating movement, it has remained a challenge to elucidate the properties of the locomotor rhythm across species. Neurophysiological experimental evidence indicates similarities in the function of interneurons mediating afferent information regarding muscle stretch and loading, being affected by motor axon collaterals and those mediating presynaptic inhibition in animals and humans when their function is assessed at rest. However, significantly different muscle activation profiles are observed during locomotion across species. This difference may potentially be driven by a modified distribution of muscle afferents at multiple segmental levels in humans, resulting in an altered interaction between different classes of spinal interneurons. Further, different classes of spinal interneurons are likely activated or silent to some extent simultaneously in all species. Regardless of these limitations, continuous efforts on the function of spinal interneuronal circuits during mammalian locomotion will assist in delineating the neural mechanisms underlying locomotor control, and help develop novel targeted rehabilitation strategies in cases of impaired bipedal gait in humans. These rehabilitation strategies will include activity-based therapies and targeted neuromodulation of spinal interneuronal circuits via repetitive stimulation delivered to the brain and/or spinal cord.

Indexed as

interneuronslocomotionmotoneuronsspinal neural circuitsspinal reflexes

Identifiers

PMID29988534
PMCPMC6026662
OpenAlexW2811275898

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.