Sleep Enhances Implicit Motor Skill Learning in Individuals Poststroke
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although sleep has been demonstrated to be critical for learning and the consolidation of memories in neurologically intact individuals, the importance of sleep for learning in neuropathological populations remains unknown. METHOD: To assess the influence of sleep on implicit motor skill learning and memory consolidation post stroke, 18 individuals with stroke and 18 neurologically intact age-matched individuals were assigned to either the sleep group (slept between practice of a continuous tracking task and retention testing) or the no-sleep group (stayed awake between practice and retention testing). RESULTS: Only the individuals post stroke who slept between practice and retention testing demonstrated implicit motor learning at retention. The individuals with stroke who did not sleep and both the age-matched control groups (sleep and no-sleep) failed to demonstrate learning. These findings provide evidence that after stroke individuals can enhance implicit motor skill learning and motor memory consolidation by sleeping between practice and retention tests. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that ensuring adequate sleep between rehabilitation therapy sessions and normalizing sleep cycles following stroke may be important variables that can positively influence implicit motor learning after stroke-related brain damage.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".