Cited by 78Historical and Modern Theater StudiesNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesCognitive Functions and Memory

Clinical Assessment of Prefrontal Lobe Functions

Henri-Bhargava, Alexandre, Stuss, Donald T., Freedman, Morris·2018·Continuum

Abstract

Purpose of review Whereas it was previously thought that there was a single overarching frontal lobe syndrome, it is now clear that several distinct cognitive and behavioral processes are mediated by the frontal lobes. This article reviews these processes and the underlying neuroanatomy and provides an approach to the assessment of prefrontal lobe functions at the bedside. Recent findings Cognitive and behavioral frontal lobe functions are mediated by the prefrontal regions rather than the frontal lobes as a whole. At least five separate prefrontal functions have been defined: energization, task setting, monitoring, behavioral/emotional regulation, and metacognition. Energization is mediated by the superior medial prefrontal cortices bilaterally, task setting by the left lateral frontal cortex, monitoring by the right lateral prefrontal cortex, behavioral/emotional regulation by the orbitofrontal cortex, and metacognition by the frontal poles. Only task setting and monitoring are considered executive functions. Summary Distinct cognitive and behavioral processes are mediated by different parts of the frontal lobe. Lesions in these areas result in characteristic clinical deficits that are discussed in this article. Key messages are that prefrontal regions mediate the higher cortical functions (as opposed to the frontal lobes in general) and that prefrontal functions are not equivalent to executive functions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/con.0000000000000609

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Lesion studies show that areas of the PFC can be removed with little apparent change in conscious experience to the patient, whereas lesions in primary motor or sensory areas cause striking differences in content-specific perceptual experience.

    “Consistent with Penfield's findings, lesion studies from a century of neurosurgery research show that areas of the PFC can be removed with little apparent change in conscious experience to the patient, whereas lesions in primary motor or sensory areas (often referred to as eloquent cortex) cause striking differences in content-specific perceptual experience (Henri- Bhargava et al., 2018; Koch, 201”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Henri-Bhargava, A., Stuss, D. T., & Freedman, M.
Venue
Continuum
Published
2018-06
Volume
24
Issue
3
Pages
704-726
ISSN
  • 1080-2371 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-6899
OpenAlex
W2806648059
Cited by
78
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2
FWCI
0.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • CONTINUUM Lifelong Learning in Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Functions and Memory
Keywords
frontal lobe syndrome, executive function, energization, task setting, monitoring, metacognition, orbitofrontal cortex, frontal pole, frontal lobe lesions, bedside assessment, neuroanatomy
MeSH terms
Behavior, Cognition, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Neuropsychological Tests, Prefrontal Cortex, Executive Function

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