UNLABELLED: [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 29(2) of Neuropsychology (see record 2014-42242-001). The funding source information was missing from the author note, and A. M. Barrett's institutional affiliation was incorrect. The funding source information and Barrett's correct institutional affiliation are provided in the erratum.] OBJECTIVE: The sparse existing research on ipsilesional neglect supports an association of this disorder with damage to the right frontal and subcortical brain networks. It is believed that dysfunction in these networks may result in primarily "aiming" motor-intentional spatial errors. The purpose of this study was to confirm whether frontal-subcortical circuits are indeed commonly affected in ipsilesional neglect and to determine the relative presence of "aiming" motor-intentional versus "where" perceptual-attentional spatial errors in these individuals. METHODS: We identified 12 participants with ipsilesional neglect based on a computerized line bisection task and used the line bisection data to quantify participants' perceptual-attentional and motor-intentional errors. We were able to discriminate between these 2 biases using the algebraic solutions for 2 separate equations, one for "aiming" and one for "where" biases. Lesion mapping was conducted for all participants using MRIcron software; lesion checklist and overlap analysis were created from these images. RESULTS: A greater percentage of participants with ipsilesional neglect had frontal/subcortical damage (83%) compared with the expected percentage (27%) observed in published patient samples with contralesional neglect. We observed the greatest area of lesion overlap in frontal lobe white matter pathways. Nevertheless, participants with ipsilesional neglect made primarily "where" rather than "aiming" spatial errors. CONCLUSION: Our data confirm previous research suggesting that ipsilesional neglect may result from lesions to the right frontal-subcortical networks. Furthermore, in our group, ipsilesional neglect was also strongly associated with primarily "where" perceptual-attentional bias, and less so with "aiming" motor-intentional spatial bias. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved.
UNLABELLED: [Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 29(2) of Neuropsychology (see record 2014-42242-001). The funding source information was missing from the author note, and A. M. Barrett's institutional affiliation was incorrect. The funding source information and Barrett's correct institutional affiliation are provided in the erratum.] OBJECTIVE: The sparse existing research on ipsilesional neglect supports an association of this disorder with damage to the right frontal and subcortical brain networks. It is believed that dysfunction in these networks may result in primarily "aiming" motor-intentional spatial errors. The purpose of this study was to confirm whether frontal-subcortical circuits are indeed commonly affected in ipsilesional neglect and to determine the relative presence of "aiming" motor-intentional versus "where" perceptual-attentional spatial errors in these individuals. METHODS: We identified 12 participants with ipsilesional neglect based on a computerized line bisection task and used the line bisection data to quantify participants' perceptual-attentional and motor-intentional errors. We were able to discriminate between these 2 biases using the algebraic solutions for 2 separate equations, one for "aiming" and one for "where" biases. Lesion mapping was conducted for all participants using MRIcron software; lesion checklist and overlap analysis were created from these images. RESULTS: A greater percentage of participants with ipsilesional neglect had frontal/subcortical damage (83%) compared with the expected percentage (27%) observed in published patient samples with contralesional neglect. We observed the greatest area of lesion overlap in frontal lobe white matter pathways. Nevertheless, participants with ipsilesional neglect made primarily "where" rather than "aiming" spatial errors. CONCLUSION: Our data confirm previous research suggesting that ipsilesional neglect may result from lesions to the right frontal-subcortical networks. Furthermore, in our group, ipsilesional neglect was also strongly associated with primarily "where" perceptual-attentional bias, and less so with "aiming" motor-intentional spatial bias. PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved.
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: Philippe Azouvi; Sylvie Olivier; Godeleine de Montety; Christiane Samuel; Anne Louis-Dreyfus; Luigi Tesio Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Kelly M Goedert; Peii Chen; Raymond C Boston; Anne L Foundas; A M Barrett Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2013-12-27 Impact factor: 3.919