ReviewAging2024
Considering the response in addition to the challenge - a narrative review in appraisal of a motor reserve framework.
Review in Aging, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effectiveness of Treadmill Training Intervention for the Management of Patients With Stroke: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of nursing practice · 2025Pooled it
- Complex, but not simple, motor tasks assessment improves detection of motor-cognitive interaction in midlife.GeroScience · 2026Article
- Unlocking motor reserve: behavioral and neuroimaging correlates of locomotor adaptability from youth to old age.Frontiers in systems neuroscience · 2025Article
- Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The remarkable increase in human life expectancy over the past century has been achieved at the expense of the risk of age-related impairment and disease. Neurodegeneration, be it part of normal aging or due to neurodegenerative disorders, is characterized by loss of specific neuronal populations, leading to increasing clinical impairment. The individual course may be described as balance between aging- or disease-related pathology and intrinsic mechanisms of adaptation. There is plenty of evidence that the human brain is provided with exhaustible resources to maintain function in the face of adverse conditions. While a reserve concept has mainly been coined in cognitive neuroscience, emerging evidence suggests similar mechanisms to underlie individual differences of adaptive capacity within the motor system. In this narrative review, we summarize what has been proposed to date about a motor reserve (mR) framework. We present current evidence from research in aging subjects and people with neurological conditions, followed by a description of what is known about potential neuronal substrates of mR so far. As there is no gold standard of mR quantification, we outline current approaches which describe various indicators of mR. We conclude by sketching out potential future directions of research. Expediting our understanding of differences in individual motor resilience towards aging and disease will eventually contribute to new, individually tailored therapeutic strategies. Provided early diagnosis, enhancing the individual mR may be suited to postpone disease onset by years and may be an efficacious contribution towards healthy aging, with an increased quality of life for the elderly.
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.