ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2017
Not moving: the fundamental but neglected motor function.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Persistence of primitive reflexes associated with asymmetries in fixation and ocular motility values.Journal of eye movement research · 2024Article
- Anti-Hebbian plasticity in the motor cortex promotes defensive freezing.Current biology : CB · 2023Article
- Enhanced cognitive interference during visuomotor tasks may cause eye-hand dyscoordination.Experimental brain research · 2023Article
- Clarifying the nature of stochastic fluctuations and accumulation processes in spontaneous movements.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- The CRAVE and ARGE scales for motivation states for physical activity and sedentarism: Brazilian Portuguese translation and single-item versions.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Neural Control of Stopping and Stabilizing the Arm.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2022Review
- Functional coupling between target selection and acquisition in the superior colliculus.Journal of neurophysiology · 2021Article
- Cognitive control and automatic interference in mind and brain: A unified model of saccadic inhibition and countermanding.Psychological review · 2020Article
- Towards a unifying mechanism for cancelling movements.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
- Movement suppression: brain mechanisms for stopping and stillness.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Article
- Abandoning and modifying one action plan for alternatives.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2017Review
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 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The function of the motor system in preventing rather than initiating movement is often overlooked. Not only are its highest levels predominantly, and tonically, inhibitory, but in general behaviour it is often intermittent, characterized by relatively short periods of activity separated by longer periods of stillness: for most of the time we are not moving, but stationary. Furthermore, these periods of immobility are not a matter of inhibition and relaxation, but require us to expend almost as much energy as when we move, and they make just as many demands on the central nervous system in controlling their performance. The mechanisms that stop movement and maintain immobility have been a greatly neglected area of the study of the brain. This paper introduces the topics to be examined in this special issue of
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.