ArticleBrain sciences2024
Age-Related Differences in Motor Skill Transfer with Brief Memory Reactivation.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Motor memories can be strengthened through online practice and offline consolidation. Offline consolidation involves the stabilization of memory traces in post-practice periods. Following initial consolidation of a motor memory, subsequent practice of the motor skill can lead to reactivation and reconsolidation of the memory trace. The length of motor memory reactivation may influence motor learning outcomes; for example, brief, as opposed to long, practice of a previously learned motor skill appears to optimize intermanual transfer in healthy young adults. However, the influence of aging on reactivation-based motor learning has been scarcely explored. Here, the effects of brief and long motor memory reactivation schedules on the retention and intermanual transfer of a visuomotor tracing task are explored in healthy older adults. Forty older adults practiced a virtual star-tracing task either three ("brief reactivation") or ten ("long reactivation") times per session over a two-week period. Comparison with a previously reported group of younger adults revealed significant age-related differences in the effect of the motor memory reactivation schedule on the intermanual transfer of the motor task. In older adults, unlike younger adults, no significant between-group differences were found by practice condition in the speed, accuracy, or skill of intermanual task transfer. That is, motor task transfer in healthy younger, but not older, adults appears to benefit from brief memory reactivation. These results support the use of age-specific motor training approaches and may inform motor practice scheduling, with possible implications for physical rehabilitation, sport, and music.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.