ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2022
A brief review of motor imagery and bimanual coordination.
Review in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 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.
- Factor Analysis of the Neurological Evaluation Scale (NES) and Corresponding Brain Function and Structures.International journal of methods in psychiatric research · 2026Article
- Different Factors Determining Motor Execution and Motor Imagery Performance in a Serial Reaction Time Task with Intrinsic Variability.Brain sciences · 2026Article
- Bridging cognition and control through passive eye movement integration in motor imagery brain-computer interfaces.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Review
- An Overall Automated Architecture Based on the Tapping Test Measurement Protocol: Hand Dexterity Assessment through an Innovative Objective Method.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- [A study on the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation combined with motor imagery on brain function based on electroencephalogram and near infrared spectrum].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Motor imagery is increasingly being used in clinical settings, such as in neurorehabilitation and brain computer interface (BCI). In stroke, patients lose upper limb function and must re-learn bimanual coordination skills necessary for the activities of daily living. Physiotherapists integrate motor imagery with physical rehabilitation to accelerate recovery. In BCIs, users are often asked to imagine a movement, often with sparse instructions. The EEG pattern that coincides with this cognitive task is captured, then used to execute an external command, such as operating a neuroprosthetic device. As such, BCIs are dependent on the efficient and reliable interpretation of motor imagery. While motor imagery improves patient outcome and informs BCI research, the cognitive and neurophysiological mechanisms which underlie it are not clear. Certain types of motor imagery techniques are more effective than others. For instance, focusing on kinesthetic cues and adopting a first-person perspective are more effective than focusing on visual cues and adopting a third-person perspective. As motor imagery becomes more dominant in neurorehabilitation and BCIs, it is important to elucidate what makes these techniques effective. The purpose of this review is to examine the research to date that focuses on both motor imagery and bimanual coordination. An assessment of current research on these two themes may serve as a useful platform for scientists and clinicians seeking to use motor imagery to help improve bimanual coordination, either through augmenting physical therapy or developing more effective BCIs.
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.