Cognitive Impairments After Stroke Do Not Attenuate Explicit Visuomotor Adaptation in Reaching and Savings With the Unaffected Arm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence suggests that motor performance is affected by the cognitive control abilities of the subject. Performance in motor tasks in populations with cognitive deficits such as older adults and subjects with stroke is therefore expected to deteriorate. The goal of this study is to investigate the relationship between cognitive impairments and motor control and learning impairments in a visuomotor adaptation task in subjects with stroke. METHODS: Twenty-seven post-stroke, 31 age matched controls, and 30 young control subjects completed a sensorimotor adaptation task composed of 2 adaptation blocks separated by a washout block. Explicit learning was assessed by cueing subjects to suppress their strategy. Cognitive assessment was conducted using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and a verbal learning test. Subjects with stroke performed the task with their unaffected arm. RESULTS: Despite the cognitive deterioration, the adaptation and savings of the stroke group and age matched controls were comparable. Adaptation and savings were smaller with respect to the young subjects. Savings was associated with a significant improvement in the explicit component across blocks. Finally, the explicit enhancement between blocks was significantly correlated with the MoCA scores in the stroke group and with the results of the verbal learning test in the young controls. CONCLUSION: The lack of stroke-induced attenuation on adaptation, despite a correlation between cognitive abilities and explicit learning in adaptation, suggests that subjects with stroke have enough cognitive resources to support sensorimotor adaptation. The availability of cognitive resources for motor learning following brain damage could be utilized in the rehabilitation process.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".