↓ Skip to main content

Do Motor Imagery Performances Depend on the Side of the Lesion at the Acute Stage of Stroke?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
99 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
Do Motor Imagery Performances Depend on the Side of the Lesion at the Acute Stage of Stroke?
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00321
Pubmed ID
Authors

Claire Kemlin, Eric Moulton, Yves Samson, Charlotte Rosso

Abstract

Motor imagery has been considered a substitute for overt motor execution to study post-stroke motor recovery. However, motor imagery abilities at the acute stage (<3 weeks) are poorly known. The aim of this study was to compare explicit and implicit motor imagery abilities in stroke patients and healthy subjects, correlate them with motor function, and investigate the role of right or left hemisphere lesions on performance. Twenty-four stroke patients at the acute stage and 24 age- and gender-matched healthy volunteers performed implicit (Hand Laterality Judgment Task) and explicit (number of imagined/executed hand movements) motor imagery tasks and a clinical motor assessment. Differences between healthy subjects and patients as well as the impact of lesion side on motor imagery were studied using ANOVA. We analyzed the relationship between motor executed and imagined movements (temporal congruence) using Pearson correlations. Our study shows that for implicit imagery, stroke patients had slower reaction times [RTs, t(46) = 1.7, p = 0.02] and higher error rates for the affected hand [t(46) = 3.7, p < 0.01] yet shared similar characteristics [angle effect: F(1,46) = 30.8, p ≤ 0.0001] with respect to healthy subjects. For the unaffected hand, right-sided stroke patients had a higher error rate and similar RTs whereas left sided stroke had higher RTs but similar error rate than healthy subjects. For explicit imagery, patients exhibited bilateral deficits compared to healthy subjects in the executed and imagined condition (p < 0.0001). Patients and healthy subjects exhibited a temporal congruence between executed and imagined movements (p ≤ 0.04) except for right-sided strokes who had no correlation for both hands. When using motor imagery as a tool for upper limb rehabilitation early after stroke, caution must be taken related to the side of the lesion.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users 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 99 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Hong Kong 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 96 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 19 19%
Researcher 15 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 11%
Student > Bachelor 7 7%
Student > Postgraduate 6 6%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 21 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 16%
Neuroscience 13 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 10 10%
Psychology 9 9%
Engineering 6 6%
Other 14 14%
Unknown 31 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 07 September 2016.
All research outputs
#6,872,420
of 26,369,011 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#2,581
of 7,818 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#102,808
of 370,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#53
of 189 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,369,011 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,818 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
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 370,970 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 189 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.