Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35776524›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2022

Selective neural coding of object, feature, and geometry spatial cues in humans.

Stephen Ramanoël, Marion Durteste, Alice Bizeul, Anthony Ozier-Lafontaine, Marcia Bécu, José-Alain Sahel, Christophe Habas, Angelo Arleo

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Stephen RamanoëlSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0003-4735-1097
Marion DurtesteSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.
Alice BizeulSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.
Anthony Ozier-LafontaineSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.
Marcia BécuSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.
José-Alain SahelSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.
Christophe HabasCHNO des Quinze-Vingts, INSERM-DGOS CIC 1423, Paris, France.
Angelo ArleoSorbonne Université, INSERM, CNRS, Institut de la Vision, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Orienting in space requires the processing of visual spatial cues. The dominant hypothesis about the brain structures mediating the coding of spatial cues stipulates the existence of a hippocampal-dependent system for the representation of geometry and a striatal-dependent system for the representation of landmarks. However, this dual-system hypothesis is based on paradigms that presented spatial cues conveying either conflicting or ambiguous spatial information and that used the term landmark to refer to both discrete three-dimensional objects and wall features. Here, we test the hypothesis of complex activation patterns in the hippocampus and the striatum during visual coding. We also postulate that object-based and feature-based navigation are not equivalent instances of landmark-based navigation. We examined how the neural networks associated with geometry-, object-, and feature-based spatial navigation compared with a control condition in a two-choice behavioral paradigm using fMRI. We showed that the hippocampus was involved in all three types of cue-based navigation, whereas the striatum was more strongly recruited in the presence of geometric cues than object or feature cues. We also found that unique, specific neural signatures were associated with each spatial cue. Object-based navigation elicited a widespread pattern of activity in temporal and occipital regions relative to feature-based navigation. These findings extend the current view of a dual, juxtaposed hippocampal-striatal system for visual spatial coding in humans. They also provide novel insights into the neural networks mediating object versus feature spatial coding, suggesting a need to distinguish these two types of landmarks in the context of human navigation.

Indexed as

CuesSpatial NavigationBrainCorpus StriatumHippocampusHumansSpace Perceptionfunctional MRIgeometryhippocampuslandmarknavigationspatial cuesstriatum

Identifiers

PMID35776524
PMCPMC9812241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.