Chinar Dara1, Jee Bang2, Rebecca F Gottesman3, Argye E Hillis4. 1. Departments of Neurology Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University; Baltimore, MD, USA. 3. Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 4. Department of Cognitive Science, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neurologists generally consider hemispatial neglect to be the primary cognitive deficit following right hemisphere lesions. However, the right hemisphere has a critical role in many cognitive, communication and social functions; for example, in processing emotional prosody (tone of voice). We tested the hypothesis that impaired recognition of emotional prosody is a more accurate indicator of right hemisphere dysfunction than is neglect. METHODS: We tested 28 right hemisphere stroke (RHS) patients and 24 hospitalized age and education matched controls with MRI, prosody testing and a hemispatial neglect battery. Emotion categorization tasks assessed recognition of emotions from prosodic cues. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to compare tests in their ability to distinguish stroke patients from controls. RESULTS: ROC analyses revealed that the Prosody Score was more effective than the Neglect Battery Score in distinguishing stroke patients from controls, as measured by area under the curve (AUC); Prosody Score = 0.84; Neglect Battery Score =0. 57. The Prosody Score correctly classified 78.9%, while Neglect Score correctly classified 55.8% of participants as patients versus controls. The Prosody Score was similar to the total NIH Stroke Scale in identifying RHS patients (AUC=0.86, correctly classifying 80.1% of patients versus controls), but the tests only partially overlapped in the patients identified. CONCLUSIONS: Severe prosody impairment may be a better indicator of right hemisphere dysfunction than neglect. Larger studies are needed to determine if including a bedside test of Prosody with the NIH Stroke Scale would most efficiently and reliably identify right hemisphere ischemia.
BACKGROUND: Neurologists generally consider hemispatial neglect to be the primary cognitive deficit following right hemisphere lesions. However, the right hemisphere has a critical role in many cognitive, communication and social functions; for example, in processing emotional prosody (tone of voice). We tested the hypothesis that impaired recognition of emotional prosody is a more accurate indicator of right hemisphere dysfunction than is neglect. METHODS: We tested 28 right hemisphere stroke (RHS) patients and 24 hospitalized age and education matched controls with MRI, prosody testing and a hemispatial neglect battery. Emotion categorization tasks assessed recognition of emotions from prosodic cues. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to compare tests in their ability to distinguish strokepatients from controls. RESULTS: ROC analyses revealed that the Prosody Score was more effective than the Neglect Battery Score in distinguishing strokepatients from controls, as measured by area under the curve (AUC); Prosody Score = 0.84; Neglect Battery Score =0. 57. The Prosody Score correctly classified 78.9%, while Neglect Score correctly classified 55.8% of participants as patients versus controls. The Prosody Score was similar to the total NIH Stroke Scale in identifying RHSpatients (AUC=0.86, correctly classifying 80.1% of patients versus controls), but the tests only partially overlapped in the patients identified. CONCLUSIONS: Severe prosody impairment may be a better indicator of right hemisphere dysfunction than neglect. Larger studies are needed to determine if including a bedside test of Prosody with the NIH Stroke Scale would most efficiently and reliably identify right hemisphere ischemia.
Entities:
Keywords:
communication; emotions; neglect; prosody; right hemisphere; stroke
Authors: Anna M Barrett; Laurel J Buxbaum; H Branch Coslett; Emmeline Edwards; Kenneth M Heilman; Argye E Hillis; William P Milberg; Ian H Robertson Journal: J Cogn Neurosci Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.225
Authors: Rebecca F Gottesman; Jonathan T Kleinman; Cameron Davis; Jennifer Heidler-Gary; Melissa Newhart; Argye E Hillis Journal: Behav Neurol Date: 2010 Impact factor: 3.342
Authors: Amy E Wright; Cameron Davis; Yessenia Gomez; Joseph Posner; Christopher Rorden; Argye E Hillis; Donna C Tippett Journal: Perspect ASHA Spec Interest Groups Date: 2016-07-12
Authors: Shannon M Sheppard; Melissa D Stockbridge; Lynsey M Keator; Laura L Murray; Margaret Lehman Blake Journal: J Int Neuropsychol Soc Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 3.114
Authors: Shannon M Sheppard; Erin L Meier; Alexandra Zezinka Durfee; Alex Walker; Jennifer Shea; Argye E Hillis Journal: Cortex Date: 2021-04-24 Impact factor: 4.644
Authors: Shannon M Sheppard; Lynsey M Keator; Bonnie L Breining; Amy E Wright; Sadhvi Saxena; Donna C Tippett; Argye E Hillis Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-12-31 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alexandra Zezinka Durfee; Shannon M Sheppard; Erin L Meier; Lisa Bunker; Erjia Cui; Ciprian Crainiceanu; Argye E Hillis Journal: Brain Sci Date: 2021-05-20