Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40198854›Full record

ReviewAnnual review of neuroscience2025

Sensory Feedback and the Dynamic Control of Movement.

Martyn Goulding, Tejapratap Bollu, Ansgar Büschges

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annual review of neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Motor Cortical Output Integrates Distorted Proprioceptive Feedback.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
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

3 authors.

Martyn GouldingMolecular Neurobiology Laboratory, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California, USA; email: goulding@salk.edu.
Tejapratap BolluMolecular Neurobiology Laboratory, The Salk Institute for Biological Studies, La Jolla, California, USA; email: goulding@salk.edu.
Ansgar BüschgesInstitute of Zoology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.

Funding

Spinal circuits for mechanical itch and light touchR35NS111643 · NINDS · SALK INSTITUTE FOR BIOLOGICAL STUDIES · PI Martyn D Goulding · 2019 to 2026
$9.7M
NINDS NIH HHS R35 NS111643
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Motor systems in animals are highly dependent on sensory information for optimal control and precision, with mechanosensory feedback from the somatosensory system playing a critical role. These mechanosensory pathways are woven into the descending feedforward pathways and local central pattern generator circuits that control and generate movement, respectively. Somatosensory feedback in mammals and insects, the two animal classes this review touches upon, is complex due to the increased demands that limbed locomotion, weight-bearing, and corrective movements place on sensorimotor control. In this review, we outline the salient features of the proprioceptive and exteroceptive sensory feedback pathways animals rely on for controlling movement and highlight some of the key principles of sensory feedback that are shared across the animal kingdom.

Indexed as

Feedback, SensoryProprioceptionAnimalsHumansMovementinhibitionmotor controlproprioceptionsomatosensory feedbackspinal cordventral nerve cord

Identifiers

PMID40198854
PMCPMC13056230

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.