Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 840

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Functions of the left superior frontal gyrus in humans: a lesion study

Boisgueheneuc, F. d., Levy, R., Volle, E., Seassau, M., Duffau, H., Kinkingnehun, S., Samson, Y., Zhang, S., Dubois, B.·2006·Brain

Abstract

The superior frontal gyrus (SFG) is thought to contribute to higher cognitive functions and particularly to working memory (WM), although the nature of its involvement remains a matter of debate. To resolve this issue, methodological tools such as lesion studies are needed to complement the functional imaging approach. We have conducted the first lesion study to investigate the role of the SFG in WM and address the following questions: do lesions of the SFG impair WM and, if so, what is the nature of the WM impairment? To answer these questions, we compared the performance of eight patients with a left prefrontal lesion restricted to the SFG with that of a group of 11 healthy control subjects and two groups of patients with focal brain lesions [prefrontal lesions sparing the SFG (n = 5) and right parietal lesions (n = 4)] in a series of WM tasks. The WM tasks (derived from the classical n-back paradigm) allowed us to study the impact of the SFG lesions on domain (verbal, spatial, face) and complexity (1-, 2- and 3-back) processing within WM. As expected, patients with a left SFG lesion exhibited a WM deficit when compared with all control groups, and the impairment increased with the complexity of the tasks. This complexity effect was significantly more marked for the spatial domain. Voxel-to-voxel mapping of each subject's performance showed that the lateral and posterior portion of the SFG (mostly Brodmann area 8, rostral to the frontal eye field) was the subregion that contributed the most to the WM impairment. These data led us to conclude that (i) the lateral and posterior portion of the left SFG is a key component of the neural network of WM; (ii) the participation of this region in WM is triggered by the highest level of executive processing; (iii) the left SFG is also involved in spatially oriented processing. Our findings support a hybrid model of the anatomical and functional organization of the lateral SFG for WM, according to which this region is involved in higher levels of WM processing (monitoring and manipulation) but remains oriented towards spatial cognition, although the domain specificity is not exclusive and is overridden by an increase in executive demand, regardless of the domain being processed. From a clinical perspective, this study provides new information on the impact of left SFG lesions on cognition that will be of use to neurologists and neurosurgeons.

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/awl244

Cites

11 of 11 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

Cited by

See all 840

Metadata

Authors
Boisgueheneuc, F. D., Levy, R., Volle, E., Seassau, M., Duffau, H., Kinkingnehun, S., Samson, Y., Zhang, S., & Dubois, B.
Venue
Brain
Published
2006-06-09
Volume
129
Issue
12
Pages
3315-3328
ISSN
  • 0006-8950 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2156
OpenAlex
W2114046308
Cited by
840
References
11
FWCI
6.60
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

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.