English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Abstract  What determines the effectiveness of neurorehabilitation approaches on the outcome of function in stroke or spinal cord injured subjects? Many studies claim that an improvement of function is based on the intensity of training, while some actual studies indicate no additional gain in function by a more intensive training after a stroke. Inherent factors seem to determine outcome, such as damage of specific tracts in stroke and level of lesion in spinal cord injured subjects, while the improvement of function achieved by an intensive training is small in relation to the spontaneous recovery. It is argued that an individual capacity of recovery exists depending on such factors. This capacity can be exploited by a repetitive execution of functional movements (supported as far as required), irrespective of the intensity and technology applied. Elderly subjects have difficulties to translate the recovery of motor deficit into function. Alternative, non-training approaches to restore motor function, such as epidural or deep brain stimulation as well as CNS repair are still in an early clinical or in a translational stage.

Restoration of motor function after CNS damage: is there a potential beyond spontaneous recovery?