Back

Impaired reach-to-grasp integration identifies cerebral visual impairment (CVI) in children and adults

Burke, C. J.; Nevin, M. W.; Grimm, D.; Mullin, C.; Peters, I. B.; Gonzalez, C. C.; Hay, I.; Shahani, U.; Ward, L. M.; Karl, J. M.

2025-12-04 neurology
10.64898/2025.12.03.25341574
Show abstract

AimCerebral Visual Impairment (CVI), an underdiagnosed cause of childhood visual impairment, presents heterogeneous symptoms involving varying degrees of dorsal and ventral stream dysfunction. We investigated whether impaired reach-to-grasp integration occurs in CVI as a potential marker of dorsal stream dysfunction. MethodPeople with CVI (children aged 7-17, n = 16; adults aged 18-25, n = 6) and control participants (children, n = 14; adults, n = 10) reached with their left hand to grasp plastic blocks with and without a blindfold. Reach-to-grasp timing and hand shaping measures were assessed using frame-by-frame video analysis. ResultsEven when they could see the block, people with CVI displayed prolonged grasp relative to reach durations, more static hand shaping during the reach, and increased reliance on non-visual hand shaping strategies after block contact to secure final grasp. The three measures were incorporated into a single composite Reach-to-Grasp Integration (RGI) score that distinguished people with CVI from controls. InterpretationTemporal, sensory, and functional dissociation of the reach and grasp occurs in CVI, consistent with dorsal stream dysfunction, and is captured by the RGI score. The RGI score could form the basis for CVI behavioural screening tools beyond standard visual assessments. What this paper addsO_LIPeople with CVI display impaired visually-guided integration of the reach and grasp, consistent with dorsal stream dysfunction. C_LIO_LIPeople with CVI use static preplanned hand shapes during visually-guided reaching. C_LIO_LIPeople with CVI rely on non-visual hand shaping strategies after target contact to facilitate grasping. C_LIO_LIThe composite Reach-to-Grasp Integration (RGI) score distinguishes CVI from control children and adults. C_LI

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 39%
13.0%
2
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 15%
10.4%
3
NeuroImage: Clinical
based on 77 papers
Top 2%
6.5%
4
Brain
based on 69 papers
Top 2%
5.4%
5
Frontiers in Neurology
based on 74 papers
Top 4%
4.6%
6
Brain Communications
based on 79 papers
Top 2%
4.6%
7
Cortex
based on 11 papers
Top 0.1%
3.0%
8
Journal of Neurology
based on 22 papers
Top 1.0%
2.9%
50% of probability mass above
9
Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology
based on 22 papers
Top 1%
2.5%
10
Neurology
based on 38 papers
Top 3%
2.5%
11
PLOS Digital Health
based on 88 papers
Top 6%
2.4%
12
Human Brain Mapping
based on 53 papers
Top 4%
1.9%
13
NeuroImage
based on 36 papers
Top 2%
1.8%
14
BMJ Open
based on 553 papers
Top 41%
1.6%
15
Scientific Data
based on 30 papers
Top 1%
1.6%
16
Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry
based on 26 papers
Top 3%
1.6%
17
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
based on 11 papers
Top 0.8%
1.4%
18
Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases
based on 15 papers
Top 1%
1.4%
19
BMC Neurology
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
1.4%
20
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
1.4%
21
Annals of Neurology
based on 43 papers
Top 4%
1.4%
22
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
based on 22 papers
Top 2%
1.4%
23
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
based on 14 papers
Top 2%
0.9%
24
Epilepsia
based on 27 papers
Top 1%
0.9%
25
Clinical Neurophysiology
based on 19 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
26
Movement Disorders
based on 49 papers
Top 3%
0.8%
27
Parkinsonism & Related Disorders
based on 16 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
28
Gait & Posture
based on 11 papers
Top 2%
0.8%
29
Frontiers in Neuroscience
based on 29 papers
Top 4%
0.8%
30
Cerebral Cortex
based on 15 papers
Top 1%
0.8%