ArticlePloS one2020
Examining implicit procedural learning in tetraplegia using an oculomotor serial reaction time task.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveClinical observations indicate that implicit procedural learning, a central component of physical and psychosocial rehabilitation, is impeded following spinal cord injury. In accordance, previous research has revealed a specific deficit in implicit sequence learning among individuals with paraplegia using a standard, manual version of the serial reaction time task. To extend these findings and shed light on the underlying sources of potential spinal cord injury-related deficits in sequence learning, we used an ocular activated serial reaction time task to compare sequence learning performance between individuals with tetraplegia and healthy controls. PARTICIPANTS AND MEASURES: Twelve participants with spinal cord injury in C5-T1 were compared to 12 matched control participants on measures derived from an ocular activated serial reaction time task. Depression and additional cognitive measures were assessed to explore the source and specificity of potential sequence learning deficits.
resultsLike controls, and in contrast with previous findings in paraplegia, the spinal cord injury group showed intact implicit sequence learning, evidenced by declining reaction times and improved anticipation over the first six blocks of the serial reaction time task, and an advantage for the initial learning sequence over a novel interference sequence.
conclusionsThe ocular activated serial reaction time task elicited a performance pattern similar to standard motor versions, such that participants with tetraplegia demonstrated unimpaired sequence learning. This suggests that previously reported implicit sequence learning deficits in spinal cord injury directly involved motor functioning rather than cognitive aspects of the task, and that the ocular activated sequence learning task could be a valid alternative for assessing implicit sequence learning in populations that cannot perform spinal-cord dependent motor tasks. Implications for post-spinal cord injury rehabilitation and adjustment are discussed.
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.