Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33683403›Full record

Trial reportExperimental brain research2021

Does sonification of action simulation training impact corticospinal excitability and audiomotor plasticity?

Fabio Castro, Ladan Osman, Giovanni Di Pino, Aleksandra Vuckovic, Alexander Nowicky, Daniel Bishop

Open access · hybridAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Experimental brain research, 2021. 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
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Fabio CastroResearch Unit of Neurophysiology and Neuroengineering of Human-Technology Interaction (NeXTlab), Università Campus Bio-Medico Di Roma, Rome, Italy. f.castro@unicampus.it.
Ladan OsmanDepartment of Life Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
Giovanni Di PinoResearch Unit of Neurophysiology and Neuroengineering of Human-Technology Interaction (NeXTlab), Università Campus Bio-Medico Di Roma, Rome, Italy.
Aleksandra VuckovicSchool of Engineering, College of Engineering and Science, James Watt Building (South) University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8QQ, UK.
Alexander NowickyCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
Daniel BishopCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience, Department of Life Sciences, College of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
Brunel University of London · GBUniversità Campus Bio-Medico · ITUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Sonification is a sensory augmentation strategy whereby a sound is associated with, and modulated by, movement. Evidence suggests that sonification could be a viable strategy to maximize learning and rehabilitation. Recent studies investigated sonification of action observation, reporting beneficial effects, especially in Parkinson's disease. However, research on simulation training-a training regime based on action observation and motor imagery, in which actions are internally simulated, without physical execution-suggest that action observation alone is suboptimal, compared to the combined use of action observation and motor imagery. In this study, we explored the effects of sonified action observation and motor imagery on corticospinal excitability, as well as to evaluate the extent of practice-dependent plasticity induced by this training. Nineteen participants were recruited to complete a practice session based on combined and congruent action observation and motor imagery (AOMI) and physical imitation of the same action. Prior to the beginning, participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups, one group (nine participants) completed the practice block with sonified AOMI, while the other group (ten participants) completed the practice without extrinsic auditory information and served as control group. To investigate practice-induced plasticity, participants completed two auditory paired associative stimulation (aPAS) protocols, one completed after the practice block, and another one completed alone, without additional interventions, at least 7 days before the practice. After the practice block, both groups significantly increased their corticospinal excitability, but sonification did not exert additional benefits, compared to non-sonified conditions. In addition, aPAS significantly increased corticospinal excitability when completed alone, but when it was primed by a practice block, no modulatory effects on corticospinal excitability were found. It is possible that sonification of combined action observation and motor imagery may not be a useful strategy to improve corticospinal, but further studies are needed to explore its relationship with performance improvements. We also confirm the neuromodulatory effect of aPAS, but its interaction with audiomotor practice remain unclear.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, MotorSimulation TrainingHumansImaginationMuscle, SkeletalPyramidal TractsTranscranial Magnetic StimulationMetaplasticityPaired associative stimulationPlasticitySensory augmentationSonificationTranscranial magnetic stimulation

Identifiers

PMID33683403
PMCPMC8144125
OpenAlexW3129830913

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.