↓ Skip to main content

Impact of Neurologic Deficits on Motor Imagery: A Systematic Review of Clinical Evaluations

Overview of attention for article published in Neuropsychology Review, April 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
106 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
292 Mendeley
Title
Impact of Neurologic Deficits on Motor Imagery: A Systematic Review of Clinical Evaluations
Published in
Neuropsychology Review, April 2014
DOI 10.1007/s11065-014-9257-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Franck Di Rienzo, Christian Collet, Nady Hoyek, Aymeric Guillot

Abstract

Motor imagery (MI, the mental representation of an action without engaging in its actual execution) is a therapeutically relevant technique to promote motor recovery after neurologic disorders. MI shares common neural and psychological bases with physical practice. Interestingly, both acute and progressive neurologic disorders impact brain motor networks, hence potentially eliciting changes in MI capacities. How experimental neuroscientists and medical practitioners should assess and take into account these changes in order to design fruitful interventions is largely unresolved. Understanding how the psychometric, behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of MI are impacted by neurologic disorders is required. To address this brain-behavior issue, we conducted a systematic review of MI data in stroke, Parkinson's disease, spinal cord injury, and amputee participants. MI evaluation methods are presented. Redundant MI profiles, primarily based on psychometric and behavioral evaluations, emerged in each clinical population. When present, changes in the psychometric and behavioral correlates of MI were highly congruent with the corresponding motor impairments. Neurophysiological recordings yielded specific changes in cerebral activations during MI, which mirrored structural and functional reorganizations due to neuroplasticity. In this view, MI capacities may not be deteriorated per se by neurologic diseases resulting in chronic motor incapacities, but adjusted to the current state of the motor system. Literature-driven orientations for future clinical research are provided.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 292 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 286 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 59 20%
Student > Bachelor 49 17%
Researcher 31 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 19 7%
Other 47 16%
Unknown 57 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 57 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 39 13%
Neuroscience 35 12%
Psychology 24 8%
Sports and Recreations 19 7%
Other 44 15%
Unknown 74 25%
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 06 March 2015.
All research outputs
#15,325,572
of 22,793,427 outputs
Outputs from Neuropsychology Review
#346
of 454 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#133,105
of 226,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Neuropsychology Review
#5
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,793,427 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 454 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.1. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% 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 226,238 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.