2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2018.08.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Over- and underestimation of motor ability after a stroke: Implications for anosognosia

Abstract: We administered a discrepancy-based measure of anosognosia for hemiplegia (AHP) to a group of 42 right-brain-damaged (RBD) and left-brain-damaged (LBD) stroke patients with varying levels of functional motor ability. In addition to the expected (anosognosic) pattern of overestimation of motor function in some RBD patients, we found an equal and opposite underestimation in some others, both RBD and LBD. We also found that around a quarter of self-estimation error could be predicted directly from actual ability,… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
10
1

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
10
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Thus, the patients with RHD in our study might be less concerned about their errors or unsuccessful use of the more-affected arm. In contrast, patients with LHD express catastrophic reactions to their disease and are often in a low mood (Carson et al, 1973;Fowler et al, 2018); therefore, they may have more concerns about their errors and unsuccessful trials made by the more-affected arm in this study. Interestingly, there was no difference in self-evaluation error even after accurate feedback from clinicians (self-evaluation error at test: −0.74 ± 1.09, self-evaluation error at retest: −0.76 ± 0.76, p > .05 in LHD, and self-evaluation error at test: −0.13 ± 1.09, self-evaluation error at retest: 0.18 ± 0.76, p > .05 in RHD).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 84%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Thus, the patients with RHD in our study might be less concerned about their errors or unsuccessful use of the more-affected arm. In contrast, patients with LHD express catastrophic reactions to their disease and are often in a low mood (Carson et al, 1973;Fowler et al, 2018); therefore, they may have more concerns about their errors and unsuccessful trials made by the more-affected arm in this study. Interestingly, there was no difference in self-evaluation error even after accurate feedback from clinicians (self-evaluation error at test: −0.74 ± 1.09, self-evaluation error at retest: −0.76 ± 0.76, p > .05 in LHD, and self-evaluation error at test: −0.13 ± 1.09, self-evaluation error at retest: 0.18 ± 0.76, p > .05 in RHD).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…This cut-off Hemispheric Differences in Self-evaluation Errors of Upper Extremity Movement in Patients with Chronic Stroke 3 allowed for a small proportion of evaluation errors that would occur in the self-awareness judgments of a human being (Della . A mean selfevaluation error greater or smaller than these cut-off scores indicated an over-or underestimation of UE performance, respectively (Fowler et al, 2018). The mean score between the cut-off scores was defined as the correct estimation.…”
Section: Actual Amount Of Use Test Assessing the Self-evaluation Errormentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Relative reports may thus be influenced by social desirability and/or expectation levels. Furthermore, UCA patients are likely to be more depressed than other patients with TLE and may therefore underestimate cognitive function, as reported in other studies of patients with neurologic disease [68,69].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…As a result, three left-sided stroke patients with diagnosed aphasia were able to communicate and participate in the assessment. This is relevant in that previously published studies focused on right-sided lesions, potentially excluding the aphasic population, which may have minimized the impact of AHP on stroke survivors (Antoniello & Gottesman, 2020; Barrett, 2021; D’Imperio et al, 2017; Fowler et al, 2018; Kirsch et al, 2021).…”
Section: Discussion and Clinical Significancementioning
confidence: 99%