Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28983244›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2017

Role of the Contralesional vs. Ipsilesional Hemisphere in Stroke Recovery.

Keith C Dodd, Veena A Nair, Vivek Prabhakaran

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 112 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
112citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
–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

112 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Systematic review: Resting state functional MRI as a biomarker for non-invasive brain stimulation in upper limb recovery post-stroke.Neurological sciences : official journal of the Italian Neurological Society and of the Italian Society of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2025
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

52 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Keith C DoddDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Wisconsin-MadisonMadison, WI, United States.
Veena A NairDepartment of Radiology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-MadisonMadison, WI, United States.
Vivek PrabhakaranDepartment of Radiology, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Wisconsin-MadisonMadison, WI, United States.

Funding

Institutional Clinical and Translational Science AwardUL1TR000427 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI DREZNER, MARC KENNETH · 2012 to 2016
$32.2M
INTEGRATED TRAINING FOR PHYSICIAN-SCIENTISTST32GM008692 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BURKARD, MARK E · 1998 to 2020
$10.3M
GENERAL PURPOSE BRAIN-COMPUTER INTERFACE(BCI)SYSTEMR01EB000856 · NIBIB · WADSWORTH CENTER · PI SCHALK, GERWIN, WOLPAW, JONATHAN RICKEL · 2002 to 2012
$9.3M
Development of a Thin-Film MicroECOG Electrode for Chronic Cortical RecordingsR01EB009103 · NIBIB · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI MORAN, DANIEL WILLIAM, WILLIAMS, JUSTIN COLE · 2008 to 2011
$2.0M
Validating Resting State fMRI Derived Brain ConnectivityRC1MH090912 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI MEYERAND, MARY E. · 2009 to 2010
$999k
Clinical Neuroengineering Training ProgramT32EB011434 · NIBIB · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI MEYERAND, MARY E., PEARCE, ROBERT A · 2011 to 2015
$869k
Stroke PlasticityK23NS086852 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI PRABHAKARAN, VIVEK · 2014 to 2017
$749k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000427NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB000856NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB009103NIBIB NIH HHS T32 EB011434NIGMS NIH HHS T32 GM008692NIMH NIH HHS RC1 MH090912NINDS NIH HHS K23 NS086852
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following a stroke, the resulting lesion creates contralateral motor impairment and an interhemispheric imbalance involving hyperexcitability of the contralesional hemisphere. Neuronal reorganization may occur on both the ipsilesional and contralesional hemispheres during recovery to regain motor functionality and therefore bilateral activation for the hemiparetic side is often observed. Although ipsilesional hemispheric reorganization is traditionally thought to be most important for successful recovery, definitive conclusions into the role and importance of the contralesional motor cortex remain under debate. Through examining recent research in functional neuroimaging investigating motor cortex changes post-stroke, as well as brain-computer interface (BCI) and transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) therapies, this review attempts to clarify the contributions of each hemisphere toward recovery. Several functional magnetic resonance imaging studies suggest that continuation of contralesional hemisphere hyperexcitability correlates with lesser recovery, however a subset of well-recovered patients demonstrate contralesional motor activity and show decreased functional capability when the contralesional hemisphere is inhibited. BCI therapy may beneficially activate either the contralesional or ipsilesional hemisphere, depending on the study design, for chronic stroke patients who are otherwise at a functional plateau. Repetitive TMS used to excite the ipsilesional motor cortex or inhibit the contralesional hemisphere has shown promise in enhancing stroke patients' recovery.

Indexed as

brain-computer interfacecontralesionalipsilesionalmotor recoverystroketranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID28983244
PMCPMC5613154

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.