Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31827143›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

Delineating the cognitive-neural substrates of writing: a large scale behavioral and voxel based morphometry study.

Haobo Chen, Xiaoping Pan, Wai-Ling Bickerton, Johnny King Lau, Jin Zhou, Beinan Zhou, Lara Harris, Pia Rotshtein

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors.

Haobo ChenDepartment of Neurology, Guangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510000, P.R. China. eychb@scut.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5378-2697
Xiaoping PanDepartment of Neurology, Guangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510000, P.R. China. qpanxp@163.com.
Wai-Ling BickertonSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Johnny King LauSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Jin ZhouDepartment of Neurology, Guangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, South China University of Technology, Guangzhou, 510000, P.R. China.
Beinan ZhouSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Lara HarrisSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.
Pia RotshteinSchool of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current study investigated the cognitive and neural substrates that underpin writing ability. We explored similarities and differences in writing numbers and words and compared these to language and manual actions in a large group of sub-acute, stroke patients (n = 740). The behavioral data showed association and dissociation in the ability to write words and numbers. Comorbidities of writing deficits with both language and motor impairments were prevalent, with less than a handful showing deficits restricted to the writing tasks. A second analysis with a subset of patients (n = 267) explored the neural networks that mediate writing abilities. Lesion to right temporal contributed to writing words, while lesions to left postcentral contributed to writing numbers. Overlapping neural mechanisms included the bilateral prefrontal cortex, right inferior parietal, left middle occipital and the right cerebellum. With the former regions associated with error pattern typical to writing based on prior knowledge (the lexical route), while lesion to left MOG was associated with errors to the phonological (non-lexical) route. Using principle components extracted from the behavioral data, we showed that right prefrontal and right parietal contributed to the ability to use pen, while lesion to bilateral prefrontal, inferior temporal and cerebellum supported unique use of pen for writing. The behavioral and imaging data suggested that writing numbers and words primarily relied on overlapping cognitive and neural functions. Incidents of pure writing deficits, in the absence of motor or language deficits were rare. Nevertheless, the PCA and neural data suggested that writing abilities were associated with some unique neuro-cognitive functions, specifically dedicated to the use of pen and the ability to transform meaning to motor command.

Indexed as

LanguageWritingAgedAged, 80 and overBrainBrain MappingCognitionFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeuropsychological TestsStrokeTomography, X-Ray Computed

Identifiers

PMID31827143
PMCPMC6906401

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.