IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0099700.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Bisecting or Not Bisecting: This Is the Neglect Question. Line Bisection Performance in the Diagnosis of Neglect in Right Brain-Damaged Patients

Author

Listed:
  • Paola Guariglia
  • Alessandro Matano
  • Laura Piccardi

Abstract

In the present study we analysed the bisecting behaviour of 287 chronic right brain-damaged patients by taking into account the presence and severity of extrapersonal and/or personal neglect diagnosed with the hemineglect battery. We also analysed right brain-damaged patients who had (or did not have) neglect according to their line bisection performance. Our results showed that performance of the line bisection task correlates with performance of cancellation tasks, reading and perceptual tasks, but not with the presence of personal neglect. Personal neglect seems to be unrelated to line bisection behaviour. Indeed, patients affected by extrapersonal and personal neglect do not show more severe neglect in line bisection than patients with only extrapersonal neglect. Furthermore, we observed that 20.56% of the patients were considered affected or not by neglect on the line bisection task compared with the other spatial tasks of the hemineglect battery. We conclude that using a battery with multiple tests is the only way to guarantee a reliable diagnosis and effectively plan for rehabilitative training.

Suggested Citation

  • Paola Guariglia & Alessandro Matano & Laura Piccardi, 2014. "Bisecting or Not Bisecting: This Is the Neglect Question. Line Bisection Performance in the Diagnosis of Neglect in Right Brain-Damaged Patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(6), pages 1-17, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0099700
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0099700
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0099700
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0099700&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0099700?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0099700. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.