ReviewBrain sciences2025
Exploring the Bidirectional Relationship Between Numerical Cognition and Motor Performance: A Systematic Review.
Review in Brain sciences, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNumerical cognition and motor performance rely on overlapping brain systems, yet the extent of their reciprocal interaction remains unclear. This systematic review explores how number processing influences motor execution and how motor activity shapes numerical cognition, emphasizing the neural mechanisms underlying these associations.
methodsA comprehensive search of Scopus, PubMed, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, PsycINFO, and SpringerLink, as well as journal citations and conference proceedings (up to August 2025), identified experimental studies examining the interplay between numerical cognition and motor performance in healthy adults. Both randomized and non-randomized designs were included. Two reviewers independently screened, extracted data, and assessed study quality following PRISMA and Cochrane Risk of Bias guidelines.
resultsTwelve studies met the inclusion criteria. Most showed that numerical stimuli facilitated motor responses, with congruent number-movement pairings yielding faster reactions and more efficient kinematics. Mental calculation often enhanced motor output (e.g., force, jump height), though interferences emerged under high cognitive load. Conversely, motor actions consistently biased numerical judgments, aligning with spatial-numerical associations.
conclusionsEvidence suggests a predominant pattern of facilitation, likely reflecting shared networks between cognitive and motor resources. These findings advance theoretical understanding and highlight promising translational applications in education, sport, and neurorehabilitation.
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.