Left cerebellar lesions may be associated with an increase in spatial neglect-like symptoms.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Each cerebellar hemisphere projects to the contralateral cerebral hemisphere. Previous research suggests a lateralization of cognitive functions in the cerebellum that mirrors the cerebral cortex, with attention/visuospatial functions represented in the left cerebellar hemisphere, and language functions in the right cerebellar hemisphere. Although there is good evidence supporting the role of the right cerebellum with language functions, the evidence supporting the notion that attention and visuospatial functions are left lateralized is less clear. Given that spatial neglect is one of the most common disorders arising from right cortical damage, we reasoned that damage to the left cerebellum would result in increased spatial neglect-like symptoms, without necessarily leading to an official diagnosis of spatial neglect. To examine this disconnection hypothesis, we analyzed neglect screening data (line bisection, cancellation, figure copying) from 20 patients with isolated unilateral cerebellar stroke. Results indicated that left cerebellar patients (n=9) missed significantly more targets on the left side of cancellation tasks compared to a normative sample. No significant effects were observed for right cerebellar patients (n=11). A lesion overlap analysis indicated that Crus II (78% overlap), and lobules VII and IX (66% overlap) were the regions most commonly damaged in left cerebellar patients. Our results are consistent with the notion that the left cerebellum may be important for attention and visuospatial functions. Given the poor prognosis typically associated with neglect, we suggest that screening for neglect symptoms, and visuospatial deficits more generally, may be important for tailoring rehabilitative efforts to help maximize recovery in cerebellar patients.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it