ReviewCurrent research in neurobiology2022
Phylogenetic view of the compensatory mechanisms in motor and sensory systems after neuronal injury.
Review in Current research in neurobiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Structural-functional connectivity coupling in motor-brain networks following acute ischemic stroke.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- An adaptive and flexible role for primary sensory cortex.Nature neuroscience · 2026Review
- Historical trends in neuroanatomical tract-tracing techniques.Anatomical science international · 2025Review
- Stimulation of corticospinal neurons by optogenetic cAMP inductions promotes motor recovery after spinal cord injury in female rats via raphespinal tract modulation.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Rehabilitation With Exergames in Individuals With Moderate to Severe Cognitive Impairment: A Case Report.Cureus · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Through phylogeny, novel neural circuits are added on top of ancient circuits. Upon injury of a novel circuit which enabled fine control, the ancient circuits can sometimes take over its function for recovery; however, the recovered function is limited according to the capacity of the ancient circuits. In this review, we discuss two examples of functional recovery after neural injury in nonhuman primate models. The first is the recovery of dexterous hand movements following damage to the corticospinal tract. The second is the recovery of visual function after injury to the primary visual cortex (V1). In the former case, the functions of the direct cortico-motoneuronal pathway, which specifically developed in higher primates for the control of fractionated digit movements, can be partly compensated for by other descending motor pathways mediated by rubrospinal, reticulospinal, and propriospinal neurons. However, the extent of recovery depends on the location of the damage and which motor systems take over its function. In the latter case, after damage to V1, which is highly developed in primates, either the direct pathway from the lateral geniculate nucleus to extrastriate visual cortices or that from the midbrain superior colliculus-pulvinar-extrastriate/parietal cortices partly takes over the function of V1. However, the state of visual awareness is no longer the same as in the intact state, which might reflect the limited capacity of the compensatory pathways in visual recognition. Such information is valuable for determining the targets of neuromodulatory therapies and setting treatment goals after brain and spinal cord injuries.
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.