2013
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2013.00162
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Hemispatial Neglect: Computer-Based Testing Allows More Sensitive Quantification of Attentional Disorders and Recovery and Might Lead to Better Evaluation of Rehabilitation

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

1
44
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
(65 reference statements)
1
44
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In conclusion, previous research has pointed out that computerized (dual) tasks may be very useful in the assessment of neglect (Schendel and Robertson, 2002; Bonato and Deouell, 2013). Before any recommendation can be made about the use of these tasks for training, further research is needed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In conclusion, previous research has pointed out that computerized (dual) tasks may be very useful in the assessment of neglect (Schendel and Robertson, 2002; Bonato and Deouell, 2013). Before any recommendation can be made about the use of these tasks for training, further research is needed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Moreover, clearly asymmetric task performance in the computerized dual tasks even occurred in some patients showing no signs of neglect in paper-and-pencil tasks. Thus, computer-based dual tasks, even though not always showing resemblance to contexts of daily living, have high diagnostic potential in the assessment of neglect and its recovery (Schendel and Robertson, 2002; Bonato and Deouell, 2013). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Though all LHD patients showed normal performance in a classic paper-and-pencil assessment battery for neglect, few of them (4 patients out of 10) showed extinction at baseline ("left" responses to bilateral targets in the single task), thereby revealing the high sensitivity of a test employing briefly presented targets which compete for awareness (Bonato & Deouell, 2013).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This was mostly reflected in the results of the computerized neglect tasks which showed a somewhat higher sensitivity for training induced changes. This higher sensitivity in contrast to paper-and-pencil tests might be credited both to a higher attentional load evoked by these tasks (Bonato et al, 2010) and by providing scoring measures that are sensitive to specific deficits (Bonato and Deouell, 2013). The patients with the highest number of initially impaired test parameters (their lesions protruded into subcortical areas, probably comprising the SLF II, thus possibly causing a parieto-frontal disconnection) tended to profit least especially from the combined training approach whereas the opposite pattern occurred for the initially less impaired patients.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%