ReviewFrontiers in systems neuroscience2022
New prospects on cerebellar reserve: Remarks on neuroprotective effects of experience in animals and humans.
Review in Frontiers in systems 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.
- Neuroplasticity in Spinal Circuits Mediated by Sexual Experience and Cerebellar Lobules.NeuroSci · 2026Article
- Bridging cognitive reserve and cerebellar networks: counteracting brain damage in patients with Alzheimer's disease at different clinical stages.Frontiers in cellular neuroscience · 2026Article
- Review
- The Role of Cognitive Reserve in Protecting Cerebellar Volumes of Older Adults with mild Cognitive Impairment.Cerebellum (London, England) · 2024Article
- Defining the concept of reserve in the motor domain: a systematic review.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Review
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
The ability of the brain to change structure and function in response to experience accounts for its ability to successfully adapt to the environment in both learning processes and unique phases, such as during development and repair. On this basis, the occurrence of the brain, cognitive, and neural reserves has been advanced to explain the discrepancies between the extent of neurological damage and the severity of clinical manifestations described in patients with different life span experiences. Research on this topic highlighted the neuroprotective role of complex stimulations, allowing the brain to better cope with the damage. This framework was initially developed by observing patients with Alzheimer's disease, and it has since been progressively expanded to multifarious pathological states. The cerebellum is known to be particularly responsive to experience through extensive plastic rearrangements. The neuroprotective value exerted by reserve mechanisms appears to be suitable for basic neuronal plasticity in the cerebellum. Thus, it is of primary interest to deepen our understanding of how life experiences modify individuals' cerebellar morphology and functionality. The present study is aimed at analyzing the evidence provided on this topic by animal and human studies. For animals, we considered the studies in which subjects were submitted to enhanced stimulations before the damage occurred. For humans, we considered studies in which previous lifelong high-level experiences were associated with superior cerebellar abilities to cope with injury. Detailed indications of the processes underlying cerebellar reserves may be important in proposing effective interventions for patients suffering from pathologies that directly or indirectly damage cerebellar functionality.
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.