Trial reportExperimental brain research2023
Moderate-intensity cardiovascular exercise performed before motor practice attenuates offline implicit motor learning in stroke survivors but not age-matched neurotypical adults.
Trial report in Experimental brain research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cardiovascular exercise enhances motor learning across multiple sessions in people with Parkinson's disease: a randomized controlled pilot trial.NPJ science of learning · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The acute impact of cardiovascular exercise on implicit motor learning of stroke survivors is still unknown. We investigated the effects of cardiovascular exercise on implicit motor learning of mild-moderately impaired chronic stroke survivors and neurotypical adults. We addressed whether exercise priming effects are time-dependent (e.g., exercise before or after practice) in the encoding (acquisition) and recall (retention) phases. Forty-five stroke survivors and 45 age-matched neurotypical adults were randomized into three sub-groups: BEFORE (exercise, then motor practice), AFTER (motor practice, then exercise), and No-EX (motor practice alone). All sub-groups practiced a serial reaction time task (five repeated and two pseudorandom sequences per day) on three consecutive days, followed 7 days later by a retention test (one repeated sequence). Exercise was performed on a stationary bike, (one 20-min bout per day) at 50% to 70% heart rate reserve. Implicit motor learning was measured as a difference score (repeated-pseudorandom sequence response time) during practice (acquisition) and recall (delayed retention). Separate analyses were performed on the stroke and neurotypical groups using linear mixed-effects models (participant ID was a random effect). There was no exercise-induced benefit on implicit motor learning for any sub-group. However, exercise performed before practice impaired encoding in neurotypical adults and attenuated retention performance of stroke survivors. There is no benefit to implicit motor learning of moderately intense cardiovascular exercise for stroke survivors or age-matched neurotypical adults, regardless of timing. Practice under a high arousal state and exercise-induced fatigue may have attenuated offline learning in stroke survivors.
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.