Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29876261›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2018

Parietofrontal network upregulation after motor stroke.

M Bönstrup, R Schulz, G Schön, B Cheng, J Feldheim, G Thomalla, C Gerloff

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Prefrontal Hierarchical Control of Corticomuscular Coherence in Stroke.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

M BönstrupDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany; Human Cortical Physiology and Neurorehabilitation Section, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA. Electronic address: marlene.boenstrup@nih.gov.
R SchulzDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
G SchönDepartment of Medical Biometry and Epidemiology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
B ChengDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
J FeldheimDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
G ThomallaDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
C GerloffDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany.
Universität Hamburg · DENational Institutes of Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Motor recovery after stroke shows a high inter-subject variability. The brain's potential to form new connections determines individual levels of recovery of motor function. Most of our daily activities require visuomotor integration, which engages parietal areas. Compared to the frontal motor system, less is known about the parietal motor system's reconfiguration related to stroke recovery. Here, we tested if functional connectivity among parietal and frontal motor areas undergoes plastic changes after stroke and assessed the behavioral relevance for motor function after stroke. Methods: We investigated stroke lesion-induced changes in functional connectivity by measuring high-density electroencephalography (EEG) and assessing task-related changes in coherence during a visually guided grip task with the paretic hand in 30 chronic stroke patients with variable motor deficits and 19 healthy control subjects. Quantitative changes in task-related coherence in sensorimotor rhythms were compared to the residual motor deficit. Results: Parietofrontal coupling was significantly stronger in patients compared to controls. Whereas motor network coupling generally increased during the task in both groups, the task-related coherence between the parietal and primary motor cortex in the stroke lesioned hemisphere showed increased connectivity across a broad range of sensorimotor rhythms. Particularly the parietofrontal task-induced coupling pattern was significantly and positively related to residual impairment in the Nine-Hole Peg Test performance and grip force. Interpretation: These results demonstrate that parietofrontal motor system integration during visually guided movements is stronger in the stroke-lesioned brain. The correlation with the residual motor deficit could either indicate an unspecific marker of motor network damage or it might indicate that upregulated parietofrontal connectivity has some impact on post-stroke motor function.

Indexed as

AgedBrain MappingElectroencephalographyFemaleFrontal LobeHand StrengthHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotor SkillsNerve NetNeural PathwaysParietal LobeRecovery of FunctionStrokeaIPS, anterior intraparietal sulcuscIPS, caudal intraparietal sulcusCoherenceCTC, communication through coherenceDCM, dynamic causal modellingEEGLCMV, linear constrained minimum varianceLME, linear mixed effectsM1, primary motor cortexMotor recoveryMVC, maximum voluntary contractionNHP, Nine-Hole Peg Test performanceParietal lobePMv, ventral premotorSMA, supplementary motor areaStrokeTR-Coh, task-related coherenceTR-Pow, task-related spectral powerUEFM, Fugl–Meyer score upper extremity subsection

Identifiers

PMID29876261
PMCPMC5987870
OpenAlexW2794054943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.