Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38189274›Full record

ArticleScience progress

A bi-cortical neuroprosthesis to modulate locomotion after incomplete spinal cord injury.

Marina Martinez

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Science progress. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Marina MartinezDépartement de Neurosciences and Centre interdisciplinaire de recherche sur le cerveau et l'apprentissage (CIRCA), Université de Montréal, Montréal, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3294-3017
Centre for Interdisciplinary Research in Rehabilitation · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neuroprosthetic strategies seek to immediately alleviate deficits and reinstate voluntary control of movement. To facilitate recovery, it is crucial to gain a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms involved in the return of intentional movement. Nevertheless, the precise relationship between the resurgence of cortical commands and the recovery of locomotion remains somewhat elusive. In the study conducted by Duguay, Bonizzato, Delivet-Mongrain, Fortier-Lebel and Martinez, we introduced a neuroprosthesis designed to deliver precise bi-cortical stimulation in a clinically relevant contusive spinal cord injury model. We conducted experiments in both healthy and spinal cord injured cats, where we fine-tuned the timing, duration, amplitude, and site of stimulation to modulate hindlimb locomotor output. In healthy cats, we observed a wide range of motor programs. However, after spinal cord injury, the induced hindlimb movements became highly stereotyped but were effective in modulating gait and reducing bilateral foot dragging. These results suggest that the neural basis for motor recovery traded off selectivity for effectiveness. Through a series of longitudinal assessments, we found that the restoration of locomotion following spinal cord injury was closely linked to the recovery of the descending neural drive. This underscores the importance of directing rehabilitation interventions toward the cortical target. The study results are discussed in terms of their impact and limitations.

Indexed as

LocomotionSpinal Cord InjuriesAnimalsCatsanimal modellocomotionmotor cortexneuroprostheticsneurostimulationrecoveryrehabilitationspinal cord injury

Identifiers

PMID38189274
PMCPMC10775731
OpenAlexW4390679281

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.