Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 317

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Evidence for distinct cognitive deficits after focal cerebellar lesions

Open access
Gottwald, B·2004·Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Anatomical evidence and lesion studies, as well as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies, indicate that the cerebellum contributes to higher cognitive functions. Cerebellar posterior lateral regions seem to be relevant for cognition, while vermal lesions seem to be associated with changes in affect. However, the results remain controversial. Deficits of patients are sometimes still attributed to motor impairment. METHODS: We present data from a detailed neuropsychological examination of 21 patients with cerebellar lesions due to tumour or haematoma, and 21 controls matched for age, sex, and years of education. RESULTS: Patients showed deficits in executive function, and in attentional processes such as working memory and divided attention. Further analysis revealed that patients with right-sided lesions were in general more impaired than those with left-sided lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Those hypotheses that suggest that lesions of the right cerebellar hemisphere lead to verbal deficits, while those of the left lead to non-verbal deficits, have in part been confirmed. The generally greater impairment of those patients with a right-sided lesion has been interpreted as resulting from the connection of the right cerebellum to the left cerebral hemisphere, which is dominant for language functions and crucial for right hand movements. Motor impairment was correlated with less than half of the cognitive measures, with no stronger tendency for correlation with cognitive tests that require motor responses discernible. The results are discussed on the basis of an assumption that the cerebellum has a predicting and preparing function, indicating that cerebellar lesions lead to a "dysmetria of thought."

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 · 10.1136/jnnp.2003.018093

Cites

42 of 42 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 42 references

Cited by

See all 317

Metadata

Authors
Gottwald, B.
Venue
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2004-11-01
Volume
75
Issue
11
Pages
1524-1531
ISSN
0022-3050 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2107187807
Cited by
317
References
42
FWCI
8.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Evidence for distinct cognitive deficits after focal cerebellar lesions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/jnnp.2003.018093
The paper
Gottwald, B. (2004). Evidence for distinct cognitive deficits after focal cerebellar lesions. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2003.018093

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.