Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30425628›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2018

Expedition Cognition: A Review and Prospective of Subterranean Neuroscience With Spaceflight Applications.

Nicolette B Mogilever, Lucrezia Zuccarelli, Ford Burles, Giuseppe Iaria, Giacomo Strapazzon, Loredana Bessone, Emily B J Coffey

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Living on the edge: How to prepare for it?Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2022
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
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.

Nicolette B MogileverMontreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Lucrezia ZuccarelliDepartment of Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Ford BurlesDepartment of Psychology, Hotchkiss Brain Institute and Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Giuseppe IariaDepartment of Psychology, Hotchkiss Brain Institute and Alberta Children's Hospital Research Institute, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.
Giacomo StrapazzonInstitute of Mountain Emergency Medicine, Eurac Research - Institute of Mountain Emergency Medicine, Bolzano, Italy.
Loredana BessoneDirectorate of Human and Robotics, Exploration, European Space Agency, Köln, Germany.
Emily B J CoffeyDepartment of Psychology, Concordia University, Montreal, QC, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Renewed interest in human space exploration has highlighted the gaps in knowledge needed for successful long-duration missions outside low-Earth orbit. Although the technical challenges of such missions are being systematically overcome, many of the unknowns in predicting mission success depend on human behavior and performance, knowledge of which must be either obtained through space research or extrapolated from human experience on Earth. Particularly in human neuroscience, laboratory-based research efforts are not closely connected to real environments such as human space exploration. As caves share several of the physical and psychological challenges of spaceflight, underground expeditions have recently been developed as a spaceflight analog for astronaut training purposes, suggesting that they might also be suitable for studying aspects of behavior and cognition that cannot be fully examined under laboratory conditions. Our objective is to foster a bi-directional exchange between cognitive neuroscientists and expedition experts by (1) describing the cave environment as a worthy space analog for human research, (2) reviewing work conducted on human neuroscience and cognition within caves, (3) exploring the range of topics for which the unique environment may prove valuable as well as obstacles and limitations, (4) outlining technologies and methods appropriate for cave use, and (5) suggesting how researchers might establish contact with potential expedition collaborators. We believe that cave expeditions, as well as other sorts of expeditions, offer unique possibilities for cognitive neuroscience that will complement laboratory work and help to improve human performance and safety in operational environments, both on Earth and in space.

Indexed as

astronautscognitionhuman factorsneurosciencepsychologyspace analogspaceflightwearable measurement

Identifiers

PMID30425628
PMCPMC6218582

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.