Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Medial versus lateral frontal lobe contributions to voluntary saccade control as revealed by the study of patients with frontal lobe degeneration
Boxer AL, Garbutt S, Rankin KP, Hellmuth J, Neuhaus J, Miller BL, Lisberger SG.. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2006-06-01
Topic: Brain proteins, microglia and lab models
Deficits in the ability to suppress automatic behaviors lead to impaired decision making, aberrant motor behavior, and impaired social function in humans with frontal lobe neurodegeneration. We have studied patients with different patterns of frontal lobe dysfunction resulting from frontotemporal lobar degeneration or Alzheimer's disease, investigating their ability to perform visually guided saccades and smooth pursuit eye movements and to suppress visually guided saccades on the antisaccade task. Patients with clinical syndromes associated with dorsal frontal lobe damage had normal visually guided saccades but were impaired relative to other patients and control subjects in smooth pursuit eye movements and on the antisaccade task. The percentage of correct antisaccade responses was correlated with neuropsychological measures of frontal lobe function and with estimates of frontal lobe gray matter volume based on analyses of structural magnetic resonance images. After controlling for age, gender, cognitive status, and potential interactions between disease group and oculomotor function, an unbiased voxel-based morphometric analysis identified the volume of a segment of the right frontal eye field (FEF) as positively correlated with antisaccade performance (less volume equaled lower percentage of correct responses) but not with either pursuit performance or antisaccade or visually guided saccade latency or gain. In contrast, the volume of the presupplementary motor area (pre-SMA) and a portion of the supplementary eye fields correlated with antisaccade latency (less volume equaled shorter latency) but not with the percentage of correct responses. These results suggest that integrity of the presupplementary motion area/supplementary eye fields is critical for supervisory processes that slow the onset of saccades, facilitating voluntary saccade targeting decisions that rely on the FEF.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Boxer, A. L., Garbutt, S., Rankin, K. P., Hellmuth, J., Neuhaus, J., Miller, B. L., et al. (2006). Medial versus lateral frontal lobe contributions to voluntary saccade control as revealed by the study of patients with frontal lobe degeneration. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0549-06.2006
Vancouver
Boxer AL, Garbutt S, Rankin KP, Hellmuth J, Neuhaus J, Miller BL, et al. Medial versus lateral frontal lobe contributions to voluntary saccade control as revealed by the study of patients with frontal lobe degeneration. The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience. 2006. doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0549-06.2006. PMID: 16763044.
BibTeX
@article{boxer2006-16763044,
author = {Boxer, A. L. and Garbutt, S. and Rankin, K. P. and Hellmuth, J. and Neuhaus, J. and Miller, B. L. and Lisberger, S. G.},
title = {{Medial versus lateral frontal lobe contributions to voluntary saccade control as revealed by the study of patients with frontal lobe degeneration}},
journal = {The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience},
year = {2006},
doi = {10.1523/jneurosci.0549-06.2006},
pmid = {16763044},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1523/jneurosci.0549-06.2006}
}
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
Key findings
- Patients with clinical syndromes associated with dorsal frontal lobe damage had normal visually guided saccades but were impaired relative to other patients and control subjects in smooth pursuit eye movements and on the antisaccade task.
- These results suggest that integrity of the presupplementary motion area/supplementary eye fields is critical for supervisory processes that slow the onset of saccades, facilitating voluntary saccade targeting decisions that rely on the FEF.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2006 — older than 20 years, still counted |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 16763044) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Related
Studies in the library that share something with this one. The line above each title says what.