neglect
Terms
undefined, object
copy deck
- Frasinetti et al 2002
- prism
- Mort et al 2003
- angular gyrus and medial temporal
- Rorden and Husain 2003
- several cog mecha, not mutually exclusive but combine to exacerbate dis
- corbeta et al 2005
- problem in neg is in areas in rh active when select target, vigilance and alertness
- shindo et al 2006
- rTMS for 2 weeks - imp 4 between 2-5 weeks
- malhart et al 2006
- ne agonist increases sustained attention in tasks
- george et al 2008
- increase arousal by top down mecha, time trial and decrease neg in letter cancellation
- posner and patterson
- model of attention, including alerting in fl and orienting in parietal
- Pizzamiglio et al 1990
- moving dots
- rizzolatti and berti 1990
- PMT
- butters et al 1990
- problem in spatial orienting of attention but BS syst still intact so stim that instead
- Halligan et al 1991
- imp in activation tasks in not hemispehric activation but spatio-mototr cues
- stone at al 1992
- RH worse prog and chronicity
- Ladavas et al 1994
- general attention retraining as effective as eye move retraining therefore not just prob with auto oreieting of attention soloely
- butter and kirsh 1992
- did eye patch, 11/13
- rossi et al 1996
- imp from prisms in recali of egocentric coor frame
- vuilleameir et al 1996
- two strokes
- Cappa et al 1997
- VS imp anog and neg for about 15 mins
- Vallar et al 1997
- TC vibe stim of neck muscles and left side electrical nervous stim both work
- Vallar et al 1998
- VS imp left side tactile extinction
- Sprague 1966
- cat CS
- Kinsbourne 1977
- vectorial model
- Weinberg et al 77/79
- RCT of scan train vs ocu thera - imp in read and write but not line bi
- Gouvier et al 1984
- no imp on line bi but on wheelchair navi
- Vallar and penani 1986
- overlap - RIPL
- Fleet and Heilman 1986
- increase arousal by ffedback and imp neg on cancellation
- Fleet et al 1987
- dopa agonist increase sustained attention
- heilman et al 1987
- rh play imp role in mediate arousal
- Robertson 1990
- pasat score and neg corr, therefore indicate prob in sustained attention or attentional capacity
- Robertson et al 1990
- Comp train vs gen comp - no dif in improvement over 6 mnth foll up
- Robertson and fasca 1992
- increase attentional load and increase latency between l and r response
- robertson and north 1992/3
- activation training of left in left increases daily life func and clin imp over 10 hours
- Walker et al 1996
- patch both eyes and measure on 5 - no dif in improvement
- Robertson et al 1997
- sustained attentiona nd general attention linked
- robertson et al 1998
- arousal and sustained attention related, decrease neg by phasic arousal
- mattingley et al 1998
- rh in left space therefore act as spatio- motor cue