Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30895342›Full record

ArticleExperimental brain research2019

Going offline: differences in the contributions of movement control processes when reaching in a typical versus novel environment.

Darrin O Wijeyaratnam, Romeo Chua, Erin K Cressman

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental brain research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

3 authors.

Darrin O WijeyaratnamSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, 125 University Private, Room 360, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3321-3411
Romeo ChuaSchool of Kinesiology, University of British Columbia, 6108 Thunderbird Boulevard, Osborne Centre Unit 2, Room 205, Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z1, Canada.
Erin K CressmanSchool of Human Kinetics, University of Ottawa, 125 University Private, Room 360, Ottawa, ON, K1N 6N5, Canada. erin.cressman@uottawa.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6833-1840

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human movements are remarkably adaptive. We are capable of completing movements in a novel visuomotor environment with similar accuracy to those performed in a typical environment. In the current study, we examined if the control processes underlying movements under typical conditions were different from those underlying novel visuomotor conditions. 16 participants were divided into two groups, one receiving continuous visual feedback during all reaches (CF), and the other receiving terminal feedback regarding movement endpoint (TF). Participants trained in a virtual environment by completing 150 reaches to three targets when (1) a cursor accurately represented their hand motion (i.e., typical environment) and (2) a cursor was rotated 45° clockwise relative to their hand motion (i.e., novel environment). Analyses of within-trial measures across 150 reaching trials revealed that participants were able to demonstrate similar movement outcomes (i.e., movement time and angular errors) regardless of visual feedback or reaching environment by the end of reach training. Furthermore, a reduction in variability across several measures (i.e., reaction time, movement time, time after peak velocity, and jerk score) over time showed that participants improved the consistency of their movements in both reaching environments. However, participants took more time and were less consistent in the timing of initiating their movements when reaching in a novel environment compared to reaching in a typical environment, even at the end of training. As well, angular error variability at different proportions of the movement trajectory was consistently greater when reaching in a novel environment across trials and within a trial. Together, the results suggest a greater contribution of offline control processes and less effective online corrective processes when reaching in a novel environment compared to when reaching in a typical environment.

Indexed as

Adaptation, PhysiologicalAdultBiomechanical PhenomenaFeedback, SensoryFemaleHumansMaleMotor ActivityPsychomotor PerformanceUser-Computer InterfaceYoung AdultKinematic analysisMovement controlReachingVisual feedbackVisuomotor adaptation

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.