Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 693

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Efficacy of Rehabilitative Experience Declines with Time after Focal Ischemic Brain Injury

Open access
Biernaskie, Jeff, Chernenko, Garry, Corbett, Dale·2004·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

To maximize the effectiveness of rehabilitative therapies after stroke, it is critical to determine when the brain is most responsive (i.e., plastic) to sensorimotor experience after injury and to focus such efforts within this period. Here, we compared the efficacy of 5 weeks of enriched rehabilitation (ER) initiated at 5 d (ER5), ER14, or ER30 after focal ischemia, as judged by functional outcome and neuromorphological change. ER5 provided marked improvement in skilled forelimb reaching ability and ladder-rung- and narrow-beam-walking tasks and attenuated the stroke-induced reliance on the unaffected forepaw for postural support. ER14 provided improvement to a somewhat lesser extent, whereas recovery was diminished after ER30 such that motor function did not differ from ischemic animals exposed to social housing. To examine potential neural substrates of the improved function, we examined dendritic morphology in the undamaged motor cortex because our previous work ( Biernaskie and Corbett, 2001 ) suggested that recovery was associated with enhanced dendritic growth in this region. ER5 increased the number of branches and complexity of layer V neurons compared with both social housing and control animals. Dendritic arbor after ER14 (although increased) and ER30 did not differ from those exposed to social housing. These data suggest that the poststroke brain displays heightened sensitivity to rehabilitative experience early after the stroke but declines with time. These findings have important implications for rehabilitation of stroke patients, many of whom experience considerable delays before therapy is initiated.

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.3834-03.2004

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 693

Metadata

Authors
Biernaskie, J., Chernenko, G., & Corbett, D.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
2004-02-04
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
1245-1254
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W2075808979
Cited by
693
References
3
FWCI
20.44
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Efficacy of Rehabilitative Experience Declines with Time after Focal Ischemic Brain Injury. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1523/jneurosci.3834-03.2004
The paper
Biernaskie, J., Chernenko, G., & Corbett, D. (2004). Efficacy of Rehabilitative Experience Declines with Time after Focal Ischemic Brain Injury. The Journal of Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.3834-03.2004

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.