Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21960307›Full record

ReviewJournal of integrative neuroscience2011

Functional recovery following motor cortex lesions in non-human primates: experimental implications for human stroke patients.

Warren G Darling, Marc A Pizzimenti, Robert J Morecraft

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of integrative neuroscience, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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

38 citing papers in PubMed, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A robust role for motor cortex.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Disengagement of Motor Cortex during Long-Term Learning Tracks the Performance Level of Learned Movements.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  20. Review
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.

Warren G DarlingDepartment of Health and Human Physiology, Motor Control Laboratories, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA. warren-darling@uiowa.edu
Marc A Pizzimenti
Robert J Morecraft
University of Iowa · USUniversity of South Dakota · US

Funding

Mechanisms of Motor Recovery after Subtotal Brain InjuryR01NS046367 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA · PI MORECRAFT, ROBERT J · 2004 to 2013
$3.2M
Mechanisms of Motor Recovery after subtotal Brain InjuryR56NS046367 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH DAKOTA · PI MORECRAFT, ROBERT J · 2009 to 2009
$431k
NINDS NIH HHS NS 046367NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS046367NINDS NIH HHS R56 NS046367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This review discusses selected classical works and contemporary research on recovery of contralesional fine hand motor function following lesions to motor areas of the cerebral cortex in non-human primates. Findings from both the classical literature and contemporary studies show that lesions of cortical motor areas induce paresis initially, but are followed by remarkable recovery of fine hand/digit motor function that depends on lesion size and post-lesion training. Indeed, in recent work where considerable quantification of fine digit function associated with grasping and manipulating small objects has been observed, very favorable recovery is possible with minimal forced use of the contralesional limb. Studies of the mechanisms underlying recovery have shown that following small lesions of the digit areas of primary motor cortex (M1), there is expansion of the digit motor representations into areas of M1 that did not produce digit movements prior to the lesion. However, after larger lesions involving the elbow, wrist and digit areas of M1, no such expansion of the motor representation was observed, suggesting that recovery was due to other cortical or subcortical areas taking over control of hand/digit movements. Recently, we showed that one possible mechanism of recovery after lesion to the arm areas of M1 and lateral premotor cortex is enhancement of corticospinal projections from the medially located supplementary motor area (M2) to spinal cord laminae containing neurons which have lost substantial input from the lateral motor areas and play a critical role in reaching and digit movements. Because human stroke and brain injury patients show variable, and usually poorer, recovery of hand motor function than that of nonhuman primates after motor cortex damage, we conclude with a discussion of implications of this work for further experimentation to improve recovery of hand function in human stroke patients.

Indexed as

AnimalsFunctional LateralityHumansMotor CortexMotor SkillsMovementRecovery of FunctionStroke

Identifiers

PMID21960307
PMCPMC3689229
OpenAlexW2166799724

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.