ArticleExperimental brain research2020
Changes in ipsilesional hand motor function differ after unilateral injury to frontal versus frontoparietal cortices in Macaca mulatta.
Article in Experimental brain research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Greater Reduction in Contralesional Hand Use After Frontoparietal Than Frontal Motor Cortex Lesions inFrontiers in systems neuroscience · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We tested the hypothesis that injury to frontoparietal sensorimotor areas causes greater initial impairments in performance and poorer recovery of ipsilesional dexterous hand/finger movements than lesions limited to frontal motor areas in rhesus monkeys. Reaching and grasping/manipulation of small targets with the ipsilesional hand were assessed for 6-12 months post-injury using two motor tests. Initial post-lesion motor skill and long-term recovery of motor skill were compared in two groups of monkeys: (1) F2 group-five cases with lesions of arm areas of primary motor cortex (M1) and lateral premotor cortex (LPMC) and (2) F2P2 group-five cases with F2 lesions + lesions of arm areas of primary somatosensory cortex and the anterior portion of area 5. Initial post-lesion reach and manipulation skills were similar to or better than pre-lesion skills in most F2 lesion cases in a difficult fine motor task but worse than pre-lesion skill in most F2P2 lesion cases in all tasks. Subsequently, reaching and manipulation skills improved over the post-lesion period to higher than pre-lesion skills in both groups, but improvements were greater in the F2 lesion group, perhaps due to additional task practice and greater ipsilesional limb use for daily activities. Poorer and slower post-lesion improvement of ipsilesional upper limb motor skill in the F2P2 cases may be due to impaired somatosensory processing. The persistent ipsilesional upper limb motor deficits frequently observed in humans after stroke are probably caused by greater subcortical white and gray matter damage than in the localized surgical injuries studied here.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.