Abstract
The meta-analysis conducted by Székely et al. described the lack of beneficial effect of prism adaptation in neglect patients. The authors concluded that the results did “not support the routine use of prism adaptation as a therapy for spatial neglect”. However, a possible nuance to this conclusion could be that the response (or lack thereof) of neglect patients to prism adaptation may actually depend on the connectional anatomy of their lesion. We develop this idea in our commentary, in order to offer a more balanced perspective on the implications of the findings obtained by Székely et al.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
