Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36618997›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in human neuroscience2022

Imagining the way forward: A review of contemporary motor imagery theory.

Austin J Hurst, Shaun G Boe

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Motor imagery in autism: a systematic review.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Perceptual and Motor Processes in Motor Imagery.The European journal of neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Austin J HurstLaboratory for Brain Recovery and Function, School of Physiotherapy, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.
Shaun G BoeLaboratory for Brain Recovery and Function, School of Physiotherapy, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past few decades, researchers have become interested in the mechanisms behind motor imagery (i.e., the mental rehearsal of action). During this time several theories of motor imagery have been proposed, offering diverging accounts of the processes responsible for motor imagery and its neural overlap with movement. In this review, we summarize the core claims of five contemporary theories of motor imagery: motor simulation theory, motor emulation theory, the motor-cognitive model, the perceptual-cognitive model, and the effects imagery model. Afterwards, we identify the key testable differences between them as well as their various points of overlap. Finally, we discuss potential future directions for theories of motor imagery.

Indexed as

action planningfunctional equivalencemental imagerymental practicemotor imagerymotor learning

Identifiers

PMID36618997
PMCPMC9815148

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.