MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806418105 · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2018.00209

Structural Gray Matter Changes in the Hippocampus and the Primary Motor Cortex on An-Hour-to-One- Day Scale Can Predict Arm-Reaching Performance Improvement

2018· article· en· W2806418105 on OpenAlexaff
Midori Kodama, Takashi Ono, Fumio Yamashita, Hiroki Ebata, Meigen Liu, Shoko Kasuga, Junichi Ushiba

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Human Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersMinistry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceKeio UniversityJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsPsychologyPrimary motor cortexMotor learningFunctional magnetic resonance imagingNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingNeuroimagingMedicinePhysical medicine and rehabilitationMotor cortexAudiologyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have revealed rapid (e.g., hours to days) training-induced cortical structural changes using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Currently, there is great interest in studying how such a rapid brain structural change affects behavioral improvement. Structural reorganization contributes to memory or enhanced information processing in the brain and may increase its capability of skill learning. If the gray matter (GM) is capable of such rapid structural reorganization upon training, the extent of volume increase may characterize the learning process. To shed light on this issue, we conducted a case series study of 5-day visuomotor learning using neuroanatomical imaging, and analyzed the effect of rapid brain structural change on motor performance improvement via regression analysis. Participants performed an upper-arm reaching task under left-right mirror-reversal for five consecutive days; T1-weighted MR imaging was performed before training, after the first and fifth days, and 1 week and 1 month after training. We detected increase in GM volume on the first day (i.e., a few hours after the first training session) in the primary motor cortex (M1), primary sensory cortex (S1), and in the hippocampal areas. Notably, regression analysis revealed that individual differences in such short-term increases were associated with the learning levels after 5 days of training. These results suggest that GM structural changes are not simply a footprint of previous motor learning but have some relationship with future motor learning. In conclusion, the present study provides new insight into the role of structural changes in causing functional changes during motor learning.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.886
Threshold uncertainty score0.541

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Human NeuroscienceSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207