ReviewExperimental brain research2015
Brain control and information transfer.
Review in Experimental brain research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Visuomotor control in mice and primates.Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews · 2021Review
- An optical brain-to-brain interface supports rapid information transmission for precise locomotion control.Science China. Life sciences · 2020Article
- Intracortical Microstimulation Modulates Cortical Induced Responses.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this review, we examine the importance of having a body as essential for the brain to transfer information about the outside world to generate appropriate motor responses. We discuss the context-dependent conditioning of the motor control neural circuits and its dependence on the completion of feedback loops, which is in close agreement with the insights of Hebb and colleagues, who have stressed that for learning to occur the body must be intact and able to interact with the outside world. Finally, we apply information theory to data from published studies to evaluate the robustness of the neuronal signals obtained by bypassing the body (as used for brain-machine interfaces) versus via the body to move in the world. We show that recording from a group of neurons that bypasses the body exhibits a vastly degraded level of transfer of information as compared to that of an entire brain using the body to engage in the normal execution of behaviour. We conclude that body sensations provide more than just feedback for movements; they sustain the necessary transfer of information as animals explore their environment, thereby creating associations through learning. This work has implications for the development of brain-machine interfaces used to move external devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.