Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 382

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 128 of the 128 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Limb apraxias

Leiguarda, Ramón C., Marsden, C. David·2000·Brain

Abstract

Limb apraxia comprises a wide spectrum of higher-order motor disorders that result from acquired brain disease affecting the performance of skilled, learned movements. At present, limb apraxia is primarily classified by the nature of the errors made by the patient and the pathways through which these errors are elicited, based on a two-system model for the organization of action: a conceptual system and a production system. Dysfunction of the former would cause ideational (or conceptual) apraxia, whereas impairment of the latter would induce ideomotor and limb-kinetic apraxia. Currently, it is possible to approach several types of limb apraxia within the framework of our knowledge of the modular organization of the brain. Multiple parallel parietofrontal circuits, devoted to specific sensorimotor transformations, have been described in monkeys: visual and somatosensory transformations for reaching; transformation of information about the location of body parts necessary for the control of movements; somatosensory transformation for posture; visual transformation for grasping; and internal representation of actions. Evidence from anatomical and functional brain imaging studies suggests that the organization of the cortical motor system in humans is based on the same principles. Imitation of postures and movements also seems to be subserved by dedicated neural systems, according to the content of the gesture (meaningful versus meaningless) to be imitated. Damage to these systems would produce different types of ideomotor and limb-kinetic praxic deficits depending on the context in which the movement is performed and the cognitive demands of the action. On the other hand, ideational (or conceptual) apraxia would reflect an inability to select and use objects due to the disruption of normal integration between systems subserving the functional knowledge of actions and those involved in object knowledge.

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 · 10.1093/brain/123.5.860

Cites

128 of 128 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 128 references

Cited by

See all 382

Metadata

Authors
Leiguarda, R. C., & Marsden, C. D.
Venue
Brain
Published
2000-05
Volume
123
Issue
5
Pages
860-879
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2164858058
Cited by
382
References
128
FWCI
6.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Limb apraxias. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/brain/123.5.860
The paper
Leiguarda, R. C., & Marsden, C. D. (2000). Limb apraxias. Brain. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/123.5.860

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.