↓ Skip to main content

Neuroanatomical Dissections of Unilateral Visual Neglect Symptoms: ALE Meta-Analysis of Lesion-Symptom Mapping

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
147 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
Neuroanatomical Dissections of Unilateral Visual Neglect Symptoms: ALE Meta-Analysis of Lesion-Symptom Mapping
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00230
Pubmed ID
Authors

Magdalena Chechlacz, Pia Rotshtein, Glyn W. Humphreys

Abstract

Unilateral visual neglect is commonly defined as impaired ability to attend to stimuli presented on the side of visual space contralateral to the brain lesion. However, behavioral analyses indicate that different neglect symptoms can dissociate. The neuroanatomy of the syndrome has been hotly debated. Some groups have argued that the syndrome is linked to posterior parietal cortex lesions, while others report damage within regions including the superior temporal gyrus, insula, and basal ganglia. Several recent neuroimaging studies provide evidence that heterogeneity in the behavioral symptoms of neglect can be matched by variations in the brain lesions, and that some of the discrepancies across earlier findings might have resulted from the use of different neuropsychological tests and/or varied measures within the same task for diagnosing neglect. In this paper, we review the evidence for dissociations between both the symptoms and the neural substrates of unilateral visual neglect, drawing on ALE (anatomic likelihood estimation) meta-analyses of lesion-symptom mapping studies. Specifically, we examine dissociations between neglect symptoms associated with impaired control of attention across space (in an egocentric frame of reference) and within objects (in an allocentric frame of reference). Results of ALE meta-analyses indicated that, while egocentric symptoms are associated with damage within perisylvian network (pre- and postcentral, supramarginal, and superior temporal gyri) and damage within sub-cortical structures, more posterior lesions including the angular, middle temporal, and middle occipital gyri are associated with allocentric symptoms. Furthermore, there was high concurrence in deficits associated with white matter lesions within long association (superior longitudinal, inferior fronto-occipital, and inferior longitudinal fasciculi) and projection (corona radiata and thalamic radiation) pathways, supporting a disconnection account of the syndrome. Using this evidence we argue that different forms of neglect link to both distinct and common patterns of gray and white matter lesions. The findings are discussed in terms of functional accounts of neglect and theoretical models based on computational studies of both normal and impaired attention functions.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 3 2%
Italy 3 2%
United States 2 1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 136 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 16%
Student > Master 21 14%
Researcher 19 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 10%
Student > Bachelor 14 10%
Other 35 24%
Unknown 21 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 33%
Neuroscience 23 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 17 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 9 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 5%
Other 10 7%
Unknown 32 22%
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 10 August 2012.
All research outputs
#20,165,369
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,513
of 7,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#221,176
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#273
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,115 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.