Cited by 63Stroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryMotor Control and AdaptationTranscranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies

Training Intensity Affects Motor Rehabilitation Efficacy Following Unilateral Ischemic Insult of the Sensorimotor Cortex in C57BL/6 Mice

Open access
Bell, Jared A., Wolke, Malerie L., Ortez, Ryan C., Jones, Theresa A., Kerr, Abigail L.·2015·Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair

Abstract

Background . Motor rehabilitative training improves behavioral functionality and promotes beneficial neural reorganization following stroke but is often insufficient to normalize function. Rodent studies have relied on skilled reaching tasks to model motor rehabilitation and explore factors contributing to its efficacy. It has been found that greater training intensity (sessions/day) and duration (training days) facilitates motor skill learning in intact animals. Whether rehabilitative training efficacy varies with intensity following stroke is unclear. Methods . Mice were trained preoperatively on a skilled reaching task. Following focal ischemic lesions, mice received rehabilitative training either twice daily (high intensity [HI]), once daily (low intensity [LI]), or not at all (control) to determine the effects of rehabilitative training intensity on skilled motor performance. Results . Within 7 days, the HI-trained mice achieved preischemic levels of performance. Mice receiving LI training eventually reached similar performance levels but required a greater quantity of training. Training intensity did not consistently affect the maintenance of performance gains, which were partially lost over time in both groups. Discussion . These data indicate that increased training intensity increases the rate of functional improvements per time and per training session following ischemic insult. Thus, training intensity is an important variable to consider in efforts to optimize rehabilitation efficacy.

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 · 10.1177/1545968314553031

Cites

Statistics

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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Bell et al. found that twice daily, higher-dose training accelerated recovery and improved final outcome compared to a once-a-day, lower-dose regimen in stroke-affected mice.

    “Recently, Bell et al.14 studied skilled reaching in stroke-affected mice and found that twice daily, higher-dose training accelerated recovery and improved final outcome compared to a once-a-day, lower-dose regimen.”

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 48 · Cited by 63

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [26]Asanuma H Pavlides C Neurobiological basis of motor learning in mammals. Neuroreport 1997 8 4 9141042

Authors
Bell, J. A., Wolke, M. L., Ortez, R. C., Jones, T. A., & Kerr, A. L.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
  • Illinois Wesleyan University (US)
Venue
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
Published
2014-10-16
Volume
29
Issue
6
Pages
590-598
ISSN
  • 0888-4390 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-9683
  • 1552-6844
OpenAlex
W1993533771
Cited by
63
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 1
FWCI
5.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurorehabilitation and neural repair (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS078791, R01NS056839)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
Keywords
motor rehabilitation, exercise intensity, stroke, skilled reaching, motor skill learning, functional recovery, performance maintenance, brain reorganization, C57BL/6 mice
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Animals, Brain Ischemia, Disease Models, Animal, Exercise Therapy, Functional Laterality, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Motor Cortex, Motor Skills, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Stroke

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