↓ Skip to main content

Dissociated repetition deficits in aphasia can reflect flexible interactions between left dorsal and ventral streams and gender-dimorphic architecture of the right dorsal stream

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
71 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Dissociated repetition deficits in aphasia can reflect flexible interactions between left dorsal and ventral streams and gender-dimorphic architecture of the right dorsal stream
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00873
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marcelo L. Berthier, Seán Froudist Walsh, Guadalupe Dávila, Alejandro Nabrozidis, Rocío Juárez y Ruiz de Mier, Antonio Gutiérrez, Irene De-Torres, Rafael Ruiz-Cruces, Francisco Alfaro, Natalia García-Casares

Abstract

Assessment of brain-damaged subjects presenting with dissociated repetition deficits after selective injury to either the left dorsal or ventral auditory pathways can provide further insight on their respective roles in verbal repetition. We evaluated repetition performance and its neural correlates using multimodal imaging (anatomical MRI, DTI, fMRI, and(18)FDG-PET) in a female patient with transcortical motor aphasia (TCMA) and in a male patient with conduction aphasia (CA) who had small contiguous but non-overlapping left perisylvian infarctions. Repetition in the TCMA patient was fully preserved except for a mild impairment in nonwords and digits, whereas the CA patient had impaired repetition of nonwords, digits and word triplet lists. Sentence repetition was impaired, but he repeated novel sentences significantly better than clichés. The TCMA patient had tissue damage and reduced metabolism in the left sensorimotor cortex and insula. DTI showed damage to the left temporo-frontal and parieto-frontal segments of the arcuate fasciculus (AF) and part of the left ventral stream together with well-developed right dorsal and ventral streams, as has been reported in more than one-third of females. The CA patient had tissue damage and reduced metabolic activity in the left temporoparietal cortex with additional metabolic decrements in the left frontal lobe. DTI showed damage to the left temporo-parietal and temporo-frontal segments of the AF, but the ventral stream was spared. The direct segment of the AF in the right hemisphere was also absent with only vestigial remains of the other dorsal subcomponents present, as is often found in males. fMRI during word and nonword repetition revealed bilateral perisylvian activation in the TCMA patient suggesting recruitment of spared segments of the left dorsal stream and right dorsal stream with propagation of signals to temporal lobe structures suggesting a compensatory reallocation of resources via the ventral streams. The CA patient showed a greater activation of these cortical areas than the TCMA patient, but these changes did not result in normal performance. Repetition of word triplet lists activated bilateral perisylvian cortices in both patients, but activation in the CA patient with very poor performance was restricted to small frontal and posterior temporal foci bilaterally. These findings suggest that dissociated repetition deficits in our cases are probably reliant on flexible interactions between left dorsal stream (spared segments, short tracts remains) and left ventral stream and on gender-dimorphic architecture of the right dorsal stream.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 71 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 71 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 21%
Student > Bachelor 11 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 11%
Student > Master 8 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 16 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 15 21%
Neuroscience 11 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 7%
Engineering 4 6%
Other 11 15%
Unknown 16 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2013.
All research outputs
#18,357,514
of 22,736,112 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,055
of 7,136 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,092
of 280,808 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#764
of 862 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,736,112 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,136 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,808 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 862 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.