Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 377

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 174 of the 174 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke

Open access
Jones, Theresa A.·2017·Nature Reviews Neuroscience

Abstract

Stroke instigates a dynamic process of repair and remodelling of remaining neural circuits, and this process is shaped by behavioural experiences. The onset of motor disability simultaneously creates a powerful incentive to develop new, compensatory ways of performing daily activities. Compensatory movement strategies that are developed in response to motor impairments can be a dominant force in shaping post-stroke neural remodelling responses and can have mixed effects on functional outcome. The possibility of selectively harnessing the effects of compensatory behaviour on neural reorganization is still an insufficiently explored route for optimizing functional outcome after stroke.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nrn.2017.26

Cites

174 of 174 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 174 references

Research works printed but not linked: 16

  1. Latash, M. L. Progress in Motor Control: Structure–Function Relations in Voluntary Movements (Human Kinetics, 2002).
  2. Foroud, A. & Whishaw, I. Q. Reaching-to-eat in humans post-stroke: fluctuating components within a constant pattern. Behav. Neurosci. 124, 851–867 (2010). · doi:10.1037/a0021112
  3. Torre, K. et al. Somatosensory-related limitations for bimanual coordination after stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 27, 507–515 (2013). · doi:10.1177/1545968313478483
  4. Lee, S. W., Triandafilou, K., Lock, B. A. & Kamper, D. G. Impairment in task-specific modulation of muscle coordination correlates with the severity of hand impairment following stroke. PLoS ONE 8, e68745 (2013). · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0068745
  5. Michaelsen, S. M., Jacobs, S., Roby-Brami, A. & Levin, M. F. Compensation for distal impairments of grasping in adults with hemiparesis. Exp. Brain Res. 157, 162–173 (2004). · doi:10.1007/s00221-004-1829-x
  6. Tretriluxana, J., Gordon, J., Fisher, B. E. & Winstein, C. J. Hemisphere specific impairments in reach-to-grasp control after stroke: effects of object size. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 23, 679–691 (2009). · doi:10.1177/1545968309332733
  7. Braun, R. G., Andrews, E. M. & Kartje, G. L. Kinematic analysis of motor recovery with human adult bone marrow-derived somatic cell therapy in a rat model of stroke. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 26, 898–906 (2012). · doi:10.1177/1545968312446004
  8. Peterson, G. M. Mechanisms of Handedness in the Rat (Johns Hopkins Press, 1934).
  9. Döbrössy, M. D. & Dunnett, S. B. The effects of lateralized training on spontaneous forelimb preference, lesion deficits, and graft-mediated functional recovery after unilateral striatal lesions in rats. Exp. Neurol. 199, 373–383 (2006). · doi:10.1016/j.expneurol.2005.12.033
  10. Erickson, C. A., Gharbawie, O. A. & Whishaw, I. Q. Attempt-dependent decrease in skilled reaching characterizes the acute postsurgical period following a forelimb motor cortex lesion: an experimental demonstration of learned nonuse in the rat. Behav. Brain Res. 179, 208–218 (2007). · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2007.02.004
  11. O'Bryant, A. J. et al. Enduring poststroke motor functional improvements by a well-timed combination of motor rehabilitative training and cortical stimulation in rats. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 143–154 (2016). · doi:10.1177/1545968314562112
  12. Bury, S. D. et al. Denervation facilitates neuronal growth in the motor cortex of rats in the presence of behavioral demand. Neurosci. Lett. 287, 85–88 (2000). · doi:10.1016/s0304-3940(00)01138-1
  13. Michaelsen, S. M., Luta, A., Roby-Brami, A. & Levin, M. F. Effect of trunk restraint on the recovery of reaching movements in hemiparetic patients. Stroke 32, 1875–1883 (2001). · doi:10.1161/01.str.32.8.1875
  14. Allred, R. P., Cappellini, C. H. & Jones, T. A. The 'good' limb makes the 'bad' limb worse: experience-dependent interhemispheric disruption of functional outcome after cortical infarcts in rats. Behav. Neurosci. 124, 124–132 (2010). · doi:10.1037/a0018457
  15. Harris-Love, M. L., Chen, E. Dromerick, A. W. & Cohen, L. G. Neural substrates of motor recovery in severely impaired stroke patients with hand paralysis. Neurorehabil. Neural Repair 30, 328–338 (2016). · DOI
  16. Lee, M. Y. et al. Cortical activation pattern of compensatory movement in stroke patients. NeuroRehabilitation 25, 255–260 (2009). · doi:10.3233/nre-2009-0523

Cited by

See all 377

Metadata

Authors
Jones, T. A.
Venue
Nature Reviews Neuroscience
Published
2017-03-23
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
267-280
ISSN
  • 1471-003X (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-0048
OpenAlex
W2600153465
Cited by
377
References
174
FWCI
5.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green
Licence

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/nrn.2017.26
The paper
Jones, T. A. (2017). Motor compensation and its effects on neural reorganization after stroke. Nature Reviews Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn.2017.26

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.