Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24671538›Full record

Trial reportJournal of neurophysiology2014

Combining d-cycloserine with motor training does not result in improved general motor learning in neurologically intact people or in people with stroke.

Kendra M Cherry, Eric J Lenze, Catherine E Lang

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of neurophysiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.2field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. D-Cycloserine in Neuropsychiatric Diseases: A Systematic Review.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2016
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. The NMDA receptor partial agonist d-cycloserine does not enhance motor learning.Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England) · 2016
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Kendra M CherryProgram in Physical Therapy, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri;
Eric J LenzeDepartment of Psychiatry, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri;
Catherine E LangProgram in Physical Therapy, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri; Program in Occupational Therapy, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri; and Department of Neurology, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri langc@wustl.edu.
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

DOCTORAL TRAINING PROGRAM IN MOVEMENT SCIENCET32HD007434 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Michael D Harris, Catherine Lang · 1993 to 2026
$4.2M
Translation of in-clinic Gains to Gains in Daily Life After StrokeR01HD068290 · NICHD · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI LANG, CATHERINE · 2012 to 2021
$4.0M
NICHD NIH HHS R01-HD-068290NICHD NIH HHS T32-HD-007434
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurological rehabilitation involving motor training has resulted in clinically meaningful improvements in function but is unable to eliminate many of the impairments associated with neurological injury. Thus there is a growing need for interventions that facilitate motor learning during rehabilitation therapy, to optimize recovery. d-Cycloserine (DCS), a partial N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor agonist that enhances neurotransmission throughout the central nervous system (Ressler KJ, Rothbaum BO, Tannenbaum L, Anderson P, Graap K, Zimand E, Hodges L, Davis M. Arch Gen Psychiatry 61: 1136-1144, 2004), has been shown to facilitate declarative and emotional learning. We therefore tested whether combining DCS with motor training facilitates motor learning after stroke in a series of two experiments. Forty-one healthy adults participated in experiment I, and twenty adults with stroke participated in experiment II of this two-session, double-blind study. Session one consisted of baseline assessment, subject randomization, and oral administration of DCS or placebo (250 mg). Subjects then participated in training on a balancing task, a simulated feeding task, and a cognitive task. Subjects returned 1-3 days later for posttest assessment. We found that all subjects had improved performance from pretest to posttest on the balancing task, the simulated feeding task, and the cognitive task. Subjects who were given DCS before motor training, however, did not show enhanced learning on the balancing task, the simulated feeding task, or the associative recognition task compared with subjects given placebo. Moreover, training on the balancing task did not generalize to a similar, untrained balance task. Our findings suggest that DCS does not enhance motor learning or motor skill generalization in neurologically intact adults or in adults with stroke.

Indexed as

Exercise TherapyAdultCognitionCycloserineDouble-Blind MethodExcitatory Amino Acid AntagonistsFeeding BehaviorFemaleHumansLearningMaleMotor ActivityNeuropsychological TestsPostural BalanceStrokeCycloserineExcitatory Amino Acid Antagonistsbehavioral trainingd-cycloserinemotor learningstroke

Identifiers

PMID24671538
PMCPMC4044442
OpenAlexW1965847458

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.