ArticleBrain and behavior2025
Comparison of Brain Activation Between Different Modes of Motor Acquisition: A Functional Near-Infrared Study.
Article in Brain and behavior, 2025. 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.
- Distinct neural mechanisms underlying the effects of agility and resistance-aerobic training on executive function and gait in young adults.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDifferent modes of motor acquisition, including motor execution (ME), motor imagery (MI), action observation (AO), and mirror visual feedback (MVF), are often used when learning new motor behavior and in clinical rehabilitation. PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate differences in brain activation during different motor acquisition modes among healthy young adults.
methodsThis cross-sectional study recruited 29 healthy young adults. Participants performed a functional reaching and grasping task under ME, MI, AO, and MVF mode with their right arms at a frequency of 0.5 Hz for 1 min per task. Each task was performed three times in a random order. Brain activation in the supplementary motor area (SMA), premotor cortices (PMC), and primary motor cortices (M1) during tasks was measured using functional near-infrared spectroscopy through 16 source-detector channels.
resultsME showed significant activation in bilateral PMC, M1, and right SMA, with higher activation in the contralateral M1. MI induced greater activity in the PMC and SMA, particularly in the ipsilateral regions. MVF resulted in significant activation in bilateral PMC, SMA, and M1. AO showed an increasing trend in brain activation, but no significant differences in any channels. Compared to AO, ME and MVF induced significantly greater brain activity in M1.
conclusionActivation levels under MI and MVF were comparable to that of ME. MI and MVF induced greater activity in the PMC and SMA, and MVF showed significant activity in all brain areas, especially in the bilateral M1. These findings support the application of different motor acquisition strategies according to individual needs. When ME cannot be executed, such as for individuals with hemiparesis or severe impairments of both upper extremities, MI and MVF may be applied, respectively, to drive neuroplastic changes.
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.