Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17366263›Full record

ReviewCerebellum (London, England)2007

The cerebellum and neural networks for rhythmic sensorimotor synchronization in the human brain.

Marco Molinari, Maria G Leggio, Michael H Thaut

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cerebellum (London, England), 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 60 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
60citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

60 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Music enrichment programs improve the neural encoding of speech in at-risk children.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2014
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Consensus Paper: Ataxic Gait.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2023
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
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.

Marco MolinariExperimental Neurorehabilitation Lab, I.R.C.C.S. Santa Lucia Foundation, Via Ardeatina 306, 00179 Rome, Italy. m.molinari@hsantalucia.it
Maria G Leggio
Michael H Thaut

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sensorimotor synchronization (SMS) is the rhythmic synchronization between a timed sensory stimulus and a motor response. This rather simple function requires complex cerebral processing whose basic mechanisms are far from clear. The importance of SMS is related to its hypothesized relevance in motor recovery following brain lesions. This is witnessed by the large number of studies in different disciplines addressing this issue. In the present review we will focus on the role of the cerebellum by referring to the general modeling of SMS functioning. Although at present no consensus exists on cerebellar timekeeping function it is generally accepted that cerebellar input and output flow process time information. Reviewed data are considered within the framework of the 'sensory coordination' hypothesis of cerebellar functioning. The idea that timing might be within the parameters that are under cerebellar control to optimize cerebral cortical functioning is advanced.

Indexed as

Cortical SynchronizationCerebellumHumansNeural PathwaysPsychomotor Performance

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.