Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38745935›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2024

Defining the concept of reserve in the motor domain: a systematic review.

Andreina Giustiniani, Angelo Quartarone

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. 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.

Andreina GiustinianiIRCCS Centro Neurolesi "Bonino-Pulejo", Messina, Italy.
Angelo QuartaroneIRCCS Centro Neurolesi "Bonino-Pulejo", Messina, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A reserve in the motor domain may underlie the capacity exhibited by some patients to maintain motor functionality in the face of a certain level of disease. This form of "motor reserve" (MR) could include cortical, cerebellar, and muscular processes. However, a systematic definition has not been provided yet. Clarifying this concept in healthy individuals and patients would be crucial for implementing prevention strategies and rehabilitation protocols. Due to its wide application in the assessment of motor system functioning, non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) may support such definition. Here, studies focusing on reserve in the motor domain and studies using NIBS were revised. Current literature highlights the ability of the motor system to create a reserve and a possible role for NIBS. MR could include several mechanisms occurring in the brain, cerebellum, and muscles, and NIBS may support the understanding of such mechanisms.

Indexed as

cerebellar reservecompensatory processesmotor impairmentmotor rehabilitationmotor system reservemotor unit reserve

Identifiers

PMID38745935
PMCPMC11091373

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.