ライフサイエンスコーパス: visuospatial

1 0; 95% CI, -0.037 to -0.004; p = 0.016), and visuospatial (-0.013; 95% CI, -0.026 to -0.001; p = 0.04

2 a non-significant association was noted for visuospatial abilities (-0.07 [0.03], p=0.052).

3 erceptual speed -0.14 [0.04], p=0.00080; and visuospatial abilities -0.13 [0.04], p=0.0080), but not

4 d performance on social perception tasks and visuospatial abilities at 5 y of age.

5 occipital, networks and enhanced reliance on visuospatial abilities for visual and verbal reasoning i

6 e effect of X-monosomy on the development of visuospatial abilities in humans.

7 A neuropsychological assessment of visuospatial abilities revealed that aspects of detail p

8 n and neuropsychological assessment of their visuospatial abilities using the Rey-Osterrieth Complex

9 rom factor analysis were used: executive and visuospatial abilities, verbal abilities, attention and

10 s on nonmotor tasks that depend on visual or visuospatial abilities.

11 1-0.24, p = 0.031), but not for attention or visuospatial abilities.

12 rved cognitive deficits in verbal ability or visuospatial ability (all P >/= .51).

13 han patients treated without chemotherapy in visuospatial ability (both P < .01).

14 s of verbal ability (g = -0.19; P < .01) and visuospatial ability (g = -0.27; P < .01).

15 d no between-group differences in changes in visuospatial ability (mean difference: Complex Figure Te

16 were associated with greater decline in both visuospatial ability (regression coefficient [b] = -0.50

17 in global cognition, memory, attention, and visuospatial ability over a median follow-up of 3.0 year

18 Associations with processing speed and visuospatial ability remained after controlling for chil

19 Visuospatial ability was negatively correlated with syst

20 predicted behavioral measures of verbal and visuospatial ability, providing direct evidence that lat

21 attention, language, executive function, and visuospatial ability.

22 ssociated with decline in semantic memory or visuospatial ability.

23 l ability, verbal memory, visual memory, and visuospatial ability.

24 limited to the domains of verbal ability and visuospatial ability.

25 nguage and verbal memory and positively with visuospatial ability.

26 n neural activation patterns associated with visuospatial analysis of scenes and contextual mnemonic

27 ctions of this area with regions involved in visuospatial analysis, suggests that the AF face patch m

28 control manipulation before they performed a visuospatial and a verbal working memory task.

29 ight-hemisphere cortical regions involved in visuospatial and attentional processing interact in a mo

30 These mice displayed intact spatial memory, visuospatial and discriminatory learning.

31 in memory, attention/executive function, and visuospatial and language domains.

32 me of the neurological underpinnings for his visuospatial and mathematical skills, as others have hyp

33 ing Tasks) were designed to probe executive, visuospatial and memory encoding domains, respectively.

34 ave important implications for understanding visuospatial and memory-retrieval deficits in patients w

35 Activation maxima associated with visuospatial and mnemonic processes were spatially segre

36 rtex has been ascribed central roles in both visuospatial and mnemonic processes.

37 pathway have demonstrated the development of visuospatial and motivational deficits following lesions

38 terations in prefrontal cortex important for visuospatial and motivational processes following bilate

39 s reviewed with regard to the integration of visuospatial and olfactory sensory information (the exte

40 ctional connectivity of networks involved in visuospatial and somatosensory processing in AN.

41 een nutrient pattern 6 and memory, language, visuospatial and speed/executive function, and mean cogn

42 oted in depressive and anxiety symptoms, and visuospatial and verbal memory.

43 d third person perspective taking using both visuospatial and verbal tasks in right-hemisphere stroke

44 to its aftereffect impacting on a number of visuospatial and visuomotor functions.

45 Some domains, such as visuospatial and working memory, are unaffected by the 1

46 domains scores (memory, attention/executive, visuospatial, and language).

47 rd 12 h:12 h light/dark (LD) cycles, object, visuospatial, and olfactory recognition performance in C

48 tical circuitry for the ability to learn new visuospatial associations (learning-to-learn) and to mak

49 with midlife visual and episodic memory and visuospatial associative learning (-0.140 standard devia

50 ic connectivity was associated with impaired visuospatial attention (rho = -0.50, p = 0.02, Spearman'

51 Visuospatial attention allows us to select and act upon

52 otopic IPS are influenced by stimulus-guided visuospatial attention and by LTM-guided visuospatial at

53 rietal research has focused on mechanisms of visuospatial attention and control-related processes, mo

54 ms devoted to shifting or maintaining covert visuospatial attention and indicate that these mechanism

55 vHC) and ventral prefrontal cortex (vPFC) in visuospatial attention and inhibitory control using a di

56 ur understanding of the relationship between visuospatial attention and perception and reveal the neu

57 relationship of retinal foveal deficits and visuospatial attention and postural control impairment i

58 s provide support for concurrent encoding of visuospatial attention and saccade preparation during vi

59 The deployment of visuospatial attention and the programming of saccades a

60 of the neural mechanisms underpinning normal visuospatial attention bias, but may also in the future

61 Whether allocation of visuospatial attention can be divorced from saccade prep

62 e detailed measurements of the topography of visuospatial attention from single-voxel, fMRI time cour

63 central structure in the midbrain network-in visuospatial attention has been shown by four seminal, p

64 behavioral paradigms for studying selective visuospatial attention in freely behaving mice.

65 Right hemisphere dominance for visuospatial attention is characteristic of most humans,

66 Visuospatial attention is contingent upon large networks

67 n contrast, it remains poorly understood how visuospatial attention is shifted in depth.

68 nkeys established that foveal processing and visuospatial attention may be linked through saccadic ey

69 ed how human fronto-parietal regions control visuospatial attention on a fine spatiotemporal scale by

70 Covertly directing visuospatial attention produces a frequency-specific mod

71 First, bilateral premotor cortex reoriented visuospatial attention specifically along the third dime

72 O mice were impaired in the acquisition of a visuospatial attention task as assessed in the 5-choice

73 sponse task of spatial working memory, (2) a visuospatial attention task that measured spatially and

74 s also performed significantly better in the visuospatial attention task, particularly in the most ch

75 uman MEG recordings in subjects performing a visuospatial attention task, we show that fluctuations i

76 We measured how IFC and DFC during a visuospatial attention task, which requires dynamic sele

77 ceptors impact dopamine homeostasis during a visuospatial attention task.

78 rol subjects (n = 18) while they performed a visuospatial attention task.

79 nected network sites in monkeys performing a visuospatial attention task.

80 ately 10 Hz) oscillations during a selective visuospatial attention task.

81 spatial-cuing task, in which they allocated visuospatial attention to either the right or left visua

82 top-down spatiotopic signals act to redirect visuospatial attention to new retinotopic locations afte

83 ments), or perceptual (covert reorienting of visuospatial attention) responses supported generalisati

84 mic arousal networks that may be involved in visuospatial attention, but these disturbances may parti

85 the 7 to 10 years thereafter, especially for visuospatial attention, F(12,96) 1.70; P=0.04 and select

86 ontrol regions to visual occipital cortex in visuospatial attention, the goal motivating the present

87 top-down control of sensory information, and visuospatial attention, with no significant differences

88 itical feature of many theoretical models of visuospatial attention.

89 use in modeling the psychological effects of visuospatial attention.

90 ded visuospatial attention and by LTM-guided visuospatial attention.

91 derlying the context-sensitive deployment of visuospatial attention.

92 atial neglect suggest a role of this area in visuospatial attention.

93 mong the brain areas usually associated with visuospatial attention.

94 of the visual field during the deployment of visuospatial attention.

95 ture that has been implicated in controlling visuospatial attention.

96 d to mechanisms supporting the allocation of visuospatial attention.

97 d network for controlling choice bias during visuospatial attention.

98 a related but separable neural mechanism of visuospatial attention.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT The very f

99 y modulated by the audiospatial, but not the visuospatial, attention task.

100 ity), and (3) functional connectivity in the visuospatial, auditory, and executive control subnetwork

101 understanding of the mechanisms underpinning visuospatial bias have remained elusive.

102 Results indicated that rightward visuospatial bias in our LPD sample arose not from abnor

103 nted for unique between-subject variation in visuospatial bias: hemispheric asymmetry in posterior al

104 terior parieto-occipital regions involved in visuospatial cognition and more functionally connected t

105 impairments in memory, language, attention, visuospatial cognition such as spatial orientation, exec

106 rmining individual differences in aspects of visuospatial cognition.

107 ter cognitive decline after 36 months in the visuospatial cognitive domain in APOE varepsilon4 allele

108 Visuospatial competencies are related to performance in

109 odulated the VOR but only if they involved a visuospatial component (e.g., binocular motion rivalry b

110 hy controls (N = 40) performed the SAT and a visuospatial condition (vSAT) while activity in the bila

111 Consistent with the visuospatial construction impairment and hypersocial per

112 acterized by progressive visuoperceptual and visuospatial deficits and commonly considered to be an a

113 atomical substrates of sub-acute and chronic visuospatial deficits associated with different aspects

114 two cognitive/behavioural hallmarks: marked visuospatial deficits relative to verbal and non-verbal

115 e deficits), and posterior cortical atrophy (visuospatial deficits).

116 acterized by progressive visuoperceptual and visuospatial deficits, most often due to atypical Alzhei

117 rvention involving a computer game with high visuospatial demands (Tetris), via disrupting consolidat

118 ity, which shows a specific association with visuospatial difficulties and may explain the failure of

119 Visuospatial difficulties are more prominent in those wh

120 n in the lateral intraparietal area during a visuospatial discrimination task.

121 s received extensive training to learn novel visuospatial discriminations (reward-guided learning).

122 nsection, they were impaired in learning new visuospatial discriminations.

123 s received extensive training to learn novel visuospatial discriminations.

124 ng was collected during the performance of a visuospatial distance judgment task with three parametri

125 ocedures from experience, including learning visuospatial domain knowledge, learning and generalizing

126 Questions specific to the visuospatial domain were associated with the most brain

127 e (beta=3.2; 95% CI=0.8 to 5.5; p=0.008) and visuospatial domain z-score (beta=7.9; 95% CI=2.0 to 13.

128 Cognitive models showed tests sensitive to visuospatial dysfunction declined earlier in posterior c

129 The source of visuospatial dysfunction is unclear, as in addition to s

130 Visuospatial dysfunction may play a crucial role in gait

131 and those receiving usual care (P=0.19), and visuospatial dysfunction occurred in 4% and 3% (P=0.80).

132 ssing attention, language, learning, memory, visuospatial, executive function, information processing

133 The visuospatial/executive and orientation domains were most

134 vs -2.02; P = .02), worse scores on tests of visuospatial function (adjusted t scores, 68.55 vs 79.57

135 mplicated in memory (medial temporal lobes), visuospatial function (occipital, right temporoparietal

136 ple logistic regression analysis showed that visuospatial function and delayed memory recognition wer

137 ld cognitive impairment group, attention and visuospatial function domains were the most serious impa

138 The pure DLB patients showed more impaired visuospatial function than pure AD or DLB+AD patients wh

139 isease (PD) is characterized by disorders of visuospatial function that can impact everyday functioni

140 d, executive function, memory, language, and visuospatial function was applied, patients were classif

141 Visuospatial function was more affected in pure DLB than

142 on and concentration, fluency, language, and visuospatial function), and between PD and CBD for the A

143 in memory/learning, motor/processing speed, visuospatial function, attention, executive function, la

144 ychological tests of executive, language and visuospatial function, less disinhibition, agitation/agg

145 us abnormalities contributing to deficits in visuospatial function.

146 l domains of executive, language, memory and visuospatial function.

147 ith impaired global cognition, attention and visuospatial function.

148 ated cognitive, attention and executive, and visuospatial function; neurologic outcomes; and physical

149 Executive function and visuospatial functioning appear to be particularly susce

150 erformance in memory, executive functioning, visuospatial functioning, and language at the time of Al

151 The relationships with visuospatial functions and brain-body-tool integration s

152 and semantic memory, language, executive and visuospatial functions assessment.

153 sures of speeded attention, verbal memory or visuospatial functions, nor were significant differences

154 functions: bilateral frontoparietal regions; visuospatial functions: right more than left occipitotem

155 t and (top-down) memory-guided generation of visuospatial imagery and navigational planning.

156 etal cortex plays a central role in encoding visuospatial information and multiple visual maps exist

157 ork that can code complex associative serial visuospatial information and support later non-conscious

158 ry through enhanced reactivation of detailed visuospatial information at retrieval.

159 , such as real-time PCR, obliterate valuable visuospatial information in tissue samples.

160 rietal cortical areas representing processed visuospatial information, translates that information in

161 Our findings suggest that visuospatial integration and scene construction processe

162 ow imagery-based artificial agents can solve visuospatial intelligence tests.

163 ng selectively alters perceptual measures of visuospatial interactions in human subjects.

164 ellectual functioning, attention, verbal and visuospatial learning and memory, visuospatial perceptio

165 control, habitual enactment of motor skills, visuospatial learning, and memory.

166 ess predictive pursuit as well as a standard visuospatial measure of working memory.

167 In the RCT, visuospatial memory (VSM) performance significantly impr

168 mpairments in working memory, verbal memory, visuospatial memory and attention significantly correlat

169 First to fifth grade gains in visuospatial memory and in speed of numeral processing p

170 Severe depression, trait anxiety, and poor visuospatial memory are the principal risk factors for l

171 ividual differences in the rate of growth of visuospatial memory during childhood and that these diff

172 above average first-to-fifth grade gains in visuospatial memory have an advantage over other childre

173 attention, executive function, language and visuospatial memory on neuropsychological evaluation (p<

174 (odds ratio=0.94, 95% CI=0.90-0.99), poorer visuospatial memory performance (odds ratio=1.60, 95% CI

175 Verbal and visuospatial memory performance was assessed in all pati

176 Developmental gains in visuospatial memory span (d = 2.4) were larger than gain

177 information and significantly improved brief visuospatial memory task performance.

178 28 age-matched control subjects performed a visuospatial memory task while their electroencephalogra

179 a were independent contributors to the Brief Visuospatial Memory Test (BVMT) of MCCB, while the inter

180 Abeta40/tau ratio was associated with Brief Visuospatial Memory Test Total Recall (Z score = 1.045;

181 , Symbol Digit Modalities Test (SDMT), Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT) and California V

182 Memory measures [Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) and Buschke Se

183 pocampal, thalamic and cingulate regions and visuospatial memory was detected in patients, but not in

184 the cingulum was negatively associated with visuospatial memory, both immediate (beta = -0.48; p = 0

185 infants (n = 99) were tested for short-term visuospatial memory, long-term episodic memory, language

186 evelopment, language development, short-term visuospatial memory, or long-term episodic memory.

187 itive deficits, often manifested as impaired visuospatial memory.

188 gnitive domains such as attention, language, visuospatial, memory and frontal executive functions whi

189 rom a posterior cortical syndrome (affecting visuospatial, mnemonic and semantic functions related to

190 d 37 matched comparison subjects performed a visuospatial n-back task, with a baseline condition (N0)

191 sponse inhibition, executive function during visuospatial navigation, cognitive flexibility, verbal m

192 en persisting after initial problems such as visuospatial neglect have resolved.

193 In this single case study, visuospatial neglect patient P1 demonstrated a dissociat

194 ased upon studies of patients suffering from visuospatial neglect, resulting from circumscribed lesio

195 uneus, left executive control, language, and visuospatial networks compared with controls.

196 minant), non-amnestic (predominant language, visuospatial or frontal symptoms), or non-specific (diff

197 behavioral and neural mechanisms underlying visuospatial orienting/reorienting in depth.

198 f attention (P = .03), memory (P = .03), and visuospatial (P = .02) cognitive domains.

199 r pulvinar and lateral geniculate nucleus in visuospatial perception and attention [4-10] and for med

200 e consequences of cholinergic enhancement on visuospatial perception in humans are unknown.

201 rgic systems does not systematically improve visuospatial perception or alter its tuning.

202 the influence of cholinergic enhancement on visuospatial perception remains unknown.

203 to closely matched analogical reasoning and visuospatial perception tasks.

204 ve performance in selected domains, that is, visuospatial perception, attention, and inhibition.

205 e on several domains of cognition, including visuospatial perception, attention, inhibition, working

206 verbal and visuospatial learning and memory, visuospatial perception, inhibitory control, cognitive f

207 In the case of visuospatial perception, it has been shown that the sens

208 g memory, semantic processing, language, and visuospatial perception.

209 ed by distractors, consistent with sharpened visuospatial perceptual representations.

210 ance becomes desynchronized, with object and visuospatial performance better at subjective midday and

211 ssion remains rhythmic, mirroring object and visuospatial performance.

212 mental perspective taking abilities (but not visuospatial perspective taking).

213 le of parietal cortex for the integration of visuospatial perturbations, and provide specific cortica

214 es of response speed, inhibitory control and visuospatial problem solving.

215 entional visuomotor, rather than attentional visuospatial, processes underlie the PA aftereffect of r

216 ciated with audiovisual integration supports visuospatial processing and attentional shifting, wherea

217 processed in a dorsal stream specialized for visuospatial processing and guided action and a ventral

218 We varied the linguistic and visuospatial processing demands in three different tasks

219 torted chairs, therefore likely unrelated to visuospatial processing of the unusual distorted shapes.

220 is task, we argue, placed greater demands on visuospatial processing than the other two tasks.

221 ttention, memory, executive functioning, and visuospatial processing were assessed and compared with

222 ction representations at different stages of visuospatial processing, but the transition from contral

223 memory, executive function, working memory, visuospatial processing, motor speed, sustained attentio

224 s associated with well-recognized effects on visuospatial processing, parieto-occipital cortical anat

225 ffected by orthogonal, cognitively demanding visuospatial processing.

226 on is associated with an unbalanced speed of visuospatial processing.

227 the left STC was sensitive to the demands of visuospatial processing.

228 g, but not in tasks that require semantic or visuospatial processing.

229 in TS may shed insights into their atypical visuospatial processing.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Turner sy

230 d answering these questions in the domain of visuospatial reasoning, looking at a case study of how i

231 tion to visual position preferences found in visuospatial receptive fields.

232 hat the left PCN may contribute a supporting visuospatial representation via its functional connectio

233 Furthermore, the visuospatial representation within the inferior parietal

234 d ventral streams for object recognition and visuospatial representation.

235 1.05]; controls, 11.78 [0.56], P < .001) and visuospatial (Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test [ROCF],

236 after interference, r = -0.48; P = .02) and visuospatial (ROCF delayed recall, r = -0.46; P = .03) m

237 = -0.24; 95% CI: -0.40, -0.08; P = .004) and visuospatial score (beta = -0.34; 95% CI: -0.56, -0.12;

238 ith poorer language (exp(b)=0.362, p<0.001), visuospatial scores (exp(b)=0.625, p<0.009) and MND-FTD

239 .725, p=0.026), language, verbal fluency and visuospatial scores, and MND-FTD (OR=7.57, 95% CI 1.55 t

240 chiatric disorder was associated with poorer visuospatial scores, MNDbi (OR=3.14, 95% CI 1.09 to 8.99

241 Visuospatial selective attention has been investigated p

242 sal adjacent subregions mark a transition to visuospatial/sensorimotor networks.

243 Here, we examined whether learning a visuospatial sequence either via manual (key presses, wi

244 Prior studies indicate that learning a visuospatial sequence via responses based on manual key

245 by the responses used to initially code the visuospatial sequence when new knowledge was applied to

246 g a non-conscious and complex (second-order) visuospatial sequence.

247 , implicit learning of patterns/order within visuospatial sequences (IL-pat) in a strongly bottom-up

248 term and working memory outcomes, 1 outcome (visuospatial short-term memory) benefited the children a

249 However, visuospatial short-term memory, associative learning, an

250 hort-term memory, F(3,33) 3.69; P=0.038, and visuospatial short-term memory, F(6,64) 2.97; P=0.013, s

251 ory training program may temporarily improve visuospatial short-term memory.

252 sks were analyzed: (1) visual detection; (2) visuospatial short-term memory; and (3) verbal short-ter

253 semantic and phonemic verbal fluency tests), visuospatial skills (Benton Judgment of Line Orientation

254 y was related to lower and faster decline in visuospatial skills (P = 0.042).

255 gned to improve reasoning, memory, planning, visuospatial skills and attention.

256 tion, executive function, verbal memory, and visuospatial skills were administered at baseline, 1 yea

257 otional function and preserving or enhancing visuospatial skills, and Alzheimer's disease showing the

258 gnition (k=11, g=0.26, 95% CI=0.01-0.52) and visuospatial skills, but these were driven by three tria

259 7), but not semantic memory, working memory, visuospatial skills, or a composite of all cognitive mea

260 ory, language, attention/executive function, visuospatial skills, PiB levels, hippocampal and ventric

261 rogressive impairment of visuoperceptual and visuospatial skills.

262 ociated with lower and more rapid decline in visuospatial skills.

263 0.16 [95% CI, -0.26 to -0.05]; P = .003) and visuospatial subnetwork (patients: 0.30; controls: 0.40;

264 functional connectivity in the auditory and visuospatial subnetworks but not in the executive contro

265 E-R score in PD (p=0.001) and CBD (p=0.001); visuospatial subscore in PD (p=0.003), PSP (p=0.022) and

266 pecificity (0.87); total ACE-R score and the visuospatial subscore were less specific (0.87 and 0.84

267 ction), and between PD and CBD for the ACE-R visuospatial subscore.

268 prediction error), rare reward surprise, and visuospatial surprise.

269 ese potential contributors, performance on a visuospatial task--line bisection--was examined together

270 ral changes after completing training in the visuospatial task.

271 lying generator configuration as in a purely visuospatial task.

272 pants self-reported difficulty with reading, visuospatial tasks (ie, close-up work or finding things

273 n between spatially segregated inputs during visuospatial tasks is not yet established.

274 PA induces neglect-like performance on some visuospatial tasks, behavioral studies of spatial attent

275 ociated with performance on semantic but not visuospatial tasks.

276 teralization and asymmetry of performance on visuospatial tasks.

277 matous male DBA/2NHsd or DBA/2J mice using a visuospatial testing box.

278 n cognitive testing, including executive and visuospatial testing, but the two groups did not differ

279 ents and control subjects in mental (but not visuospatial) third person perspective taking abilities.

280 Our results link visuospatial tuning effects of acetylcholine at the neur

281 y to the reach goal updater, that integrates visuospatial updating into grasp plans, and may help to

282 t is characterised by progressive decline in visuospatial, visuoperceptual, literacy, and praxic skil

283 - 1.5 years; 51% female) as they performed a visuospatial working memory (N-back) task.

284 Visuospatial working memory (vsWM), which is impaired in

285 A decline in visuospatial Working Memory (vWM) is a hallmark of cogni

286 ch patient group showed worse performance in visuospatial working memory compared with control subjec

287 Visuospatial working memory enables us to maintain acces

288 d neuropsychological testing and performed a visuospatial working memory functional magnetic resonanc

289 ctive GABAAR PAMs, of visual recognition and visuospatial working memory in nonhuman primates; and (2

290 areas, underlies the posterior ERP index of visuospatial working memory maintenance.

291 Functionally, RMS disrupted visuospatial working memory performance, implicating dis

292 ourne, Australia, who underwent a verbal and visuospatial working memory screening.

293 C, hippocampus, and thalamus and performed a visuospatial working memory task outside the scanner.

294 esser extent in the verbal compared with the visuospatial working memory task.

295 omologous electrophysiological signatures of visuospatial working memory to those of humans and that

296 o be critical for maintaining information in visuospatial working memory, the event-related potential

297 hich was also associated with improvement in visuospatial working memory.

298 attenuated after accounting for non-verbal (visuospatial) working memory capacity.

299 tions between regions that integrate verbal, visuospatial, working memory, and executive processes.

300 ed images that are not representative of our visuospatial world.