ArticleImaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2024
Bayesian evidence for the neural dissociation between finger and hand imitation skills.
Article in Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For limb apraxia-a heterogeneous disorder of higher motor cognition following stroke-an enduring debate has arisen regarding the existence of dissociating neural correlates for finger and hand gestures in the left hemisphere. We re-assessed this question asking whether previous attempts analyzing pooled samples of patients with deficits in only one and patients with deficits in both imitation types might have led to systematically biased results. We conducted frequentist and Bayesian, voxelwise, and regionwise lesion symptom mappings on (i) the full sample (N = 96) in which all patients with hand and/or finger imitation apraxia as well as without apraxia were included and (ii) three sub-samples, which excluded those patients from the full sample showing isolated hand imitation deficits, isolated finger imitation deficits or shared (finger and hand) imitation deficits. Anatomical analyses revealed a cortical dissociation of finger imitation deficits (located more anteriorly) and of hand imitation deficits (located more posteriorly). The presence of patients with shared deficits did, indeed, dilute associations that appeared stronger in the respective isolated samples. Also, brain regions truly associated with hand imitation deficits showed a positive bias for finger imitation deficits, when the sample contained patients with shared deficits. In addition, our frequentist parameters uncovered that some of our Bayesian evidence supported reverse associations (damage protecting from rather than increasing the deficit). Anatomo-behavioral analyses that analyze patients with shared (hand and finger) and isolated (hand or finger) imitation deficits together in one sample do, indeed, lead to undesirable biases. This explains why some earlier studies failed to detect the apparent neural dissociation between hand and finger imitation deficits.
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.