A First Step Toward the Operationalization of the Learned Non-Use Phenomenon: A Delphi Study
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: The negative discrepancy between residual functional capacity and reduced use of the contralesional hand, frequently observed after a brain lesion, has been termed Learned Non-Use (LNU) and is thought to depend on the interaction of neuronal mechanisms during recovery and learning-dependent mechanisms. Objective: Albeit the LNU phenomenon is generally accepted to exist, currently, no transdisciplinary definition exists. Furthermore, although therapeutic approaches are implemented in clinical practice targeting LNU, no standardized diagnostic routine is described in the available literature. Our objective was to reach consensus regarding a definition as well as synthesize knowledge about the current diagnostic procedures. Methods: We used a structured group communication following the Delphi method among clinical and scientific experts in the field, knowledge from both, the work with patient populations and with animal models. Results: Consensus was reached regarding a transdisciplinary definition of the LNU phenomenon. Furthermore, the mode and strategy of the diagnostic process, as well as the sources of information and outcome parameters relevant for the clinical decision making, were described with a wide range showing the current lack of a consistent universal diagnostic approach. Conclusions: The need for the development of a structured diagnostic procedure and its implementation into clinical practice is emphasized. Moreover, it exists a striking gap between the prevailing hypotheses regarding the mechanisms underlying the LNU phenomenon and the actual evidence. Therefore, basic research is needed to bridge between bedside and bench and eventually improve clinical decision making and further development of interventional strategies beyond the field of stroke rehabilitation.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Feigin, V. L., Forouzanfar, M. H., Krishnamurthi, R., Mensah, G. A., Connor, M., Bennett, D. A., Moran, A. E., Sacco, R. L., Anderson, L., Truelsen, T., et al. (2014) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)61953-4 · Cited by 3,899 · see citing works
Neglect-like symptoms in complex regional pain syndrome: Learned nonuse by another name?
Punt, D. T., Cooper, L., Hey, M., & Johnson, M. I. (2013) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2012.11.006 · Cited by 80 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
- Authors
- Hirsch, T., Barthel, M., Aarts, P., Chen, Y.-A., Freivogel, S., Johnson, M. J., Jones, T. A., Jongsma, M. L. A., Maier, M., Punt, D., Sterr, A., Wolf, S. L., & Heise, K.-F.
- Affiliations
- University of Applied Sciences and Arts Hildesheim/Holzminden/Göttingen (DE)
- Sint Maartenskliniek (NL)
- Georgia State University (US)
- Universität für Weiterbildung Krems (AT)
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- The University of Texas at Austin (US)
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology (ES)
- University of Birmingham, School of Sport, Exercise & Rehabilitation Sciences, Birmingham, UK
- University of Surrey (GB)
- Emory University (US)
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Heise, Kirstin-Friederike
- ORCID
- Venue
- Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2021-03-11
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 383-392
- ISSN
- 0888-4390 (ISSN-L)
- 1545-9683
- 1552-6844
- OpenAlex
- W3135471956
- Cited by
- 31
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 5
- FWCI
- 2.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Neurorehabilitation and neural repair (publishedVersion)
- medRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (1509816N)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
- Keywords
- learned nonuse, stroke rehabilitation, motor recovery, diagnostic procedures, expert consensus, animal models of stroke, clinical decision-making, intervention strategies
- MeSH terms
- Neurological Rehabilitation, Delphi Technique, Diagnostic Techniques, Neurological, Humans, Movement Disorders, Perceptual Disorders, Stroke, Upper Extremity
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