Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31572147›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2019

How Tool-Use Shapes Body Metric Representation: Evidence From Motor Training With and Without Robotic Assistance.

Valentina Bruno, Ilaria Carpinella, Marco Rabuffetti, Lorenzo De Giuli, Corrado Sinigaglia, Francesca Garbarini, Maurizio Ferrarin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Embodiment for Robotic Lower-Limb Exoskeletons: A Narrative Review.IEEE transactions on neural systems and rehabilitation engineering : a publication of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society · 2023
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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.

Valentina BrunoMANIBUS Laboratory, Psychology Department, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Ilaria CarpinellaIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Biomedical Technology Department, Milan, Italy.
Marco RabuffettiIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Biomedical Technology Department, Milan, Italy.
Lorenzo De GiuliPHI-LAB, Department of Philosophy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Corrado SinigagliaPHI-LAB, Department of Philosophy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Francesca GarbariniMANIBUS Laboratory, Psychology Department, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.
Maurizio FerrarinIRCCS Fondazione Don Carlo Gnocchi, Biomedical Technology Department, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous evidence has shown that tool-use can reshape one's own body schema, extending peripersonal space and modulating the representation of related body parts. Here, we investigated the role of tool action in shaping the body metric representation, by contrasting two different views. According to a first view, the shaping would rely on the mere execution of tool action, while the second view suggests that the shaping induced by tool action on body representation would primarily depend on the representation of the action goals to be accomplished. To this aim, we contrasted a condition in which participants voluntarily accomplish the movement by representing the program and goal of a tool action (i.e., active tool-use training) with a condition in which the tool-use training was produced without any prior goal representation (i.e., passive tool-use training by means of robotic assistance). If the body metric representation primarily depends on the coexistence between goal representation and bodily movements, we would expect an increase of the perceived forearm length in the post- with respect to the pre-training phase after the active training phase only. Healthy participants were asked to estimate the midpoint of their right forearm before and after 20 min of tool-use training. In the active condition, subjects performed "enfold-and-push" movements using a rake to prolong their arm. In the passive condition, subjects were asked to be completely relaxed while the movements were performed with robotic assistance. Results showed a significant increase in the perceived arm length in the post- with respect to the pre-training phase only in the active task. Interestingly, only in the post-training phase, a significant difference was found between active and passive conditions, with a higher perceived arm length in the former than in the latter. From a theoretical perspective, these findings suggest that tool-use may shape body metric representation only when action programs are motorically represented and not merely produced. From a clinical perspective, these results support the use of robots for the rehabilitation of brain-damaged hemiplegic patients, provided that robot assistance during the exercises is present only "as-needed" and that patients' motor representation is actively involved.

Indexed as

body metric representationcoexistence between goal representation and bodily movementspassive movementsperipersonal spacerobotic assistancetool-use

Identifiers

PMID31572147
PMCPMC6751246

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.