There is a large body of accumulated evidence from behavioral and neuroimaging studies regarding how and where in the brain we represent basic numerical information. A number of these studies have considered how numerical representations may differ between individuals according to their age or level of mathematical ability, but one issue rarely considered is whether the representational acuity or automaticity of using numerical representations differs between the sexes. We report 4 studies that suggest that male participants show a stronger influence of the spatial representation of number as revealed through the spatial numerical association of response codes (SNARC) effect, through the numerical distance effect (NDE), and through number-line estimations. Evidence for a sex difference in processing number was present for parity decisions (Experiment 1), color decisions (Experiment 2), number-line estimations (Experiment 3), and magnitude decisions (Experiment 4). We argue that this pattern of results reflects a sex difference in either the acuity of representation or reliance upon spatial representations of number, and that this difference may arise due to differences in the parietal lobes of men and women.

There is evidence from the SNARC (spatial-numerical association of response codes) effect and NDE (numerical distance effect) that number activates spatial representations. Most of this evidence comes from tasks with explicit reference to number, whether through presentation of Arabic digits (SNARC) or through magnitude decisions to nonsymbolic representations (NDE). Here, we report four studies that use the neural overlap paradigm developed by Fias, Lauwereyns, and Lammertyn (2001) to examine whether the presentation of implicit and task-irrelevant numerosity information (nonsymbolic arrays and auditory numbers) is enough to activate a spatial representation of number. Participants were presented with either numerosity arrays (1-9 circles or triangles) to which they made colour (experiment 1) or orientation (experiment 2) judgements, or auditory numbers coupled with an on-screen stimulus to which they made a colour (experiment 3) or orientation (experiment 4) judgement. SNARC effects were observed only for the orientation tasks. Following the logic of Fias et al., we argue that this SNARC effect occurs as a result of overlap in parietal processing for number and orientation judgements irrespective of modality. Furthermore, we found stronger SNARC effects in the small number range (1-4) than in the larger number range (6-9) for both nonsymbolic displays and auditory numbers. These results suggest that quantity is extracted (and interferes with responses in the orientation task) but this is not exact for the entire number range. We discuss a number of alternative models and mechanisms of numerical processing that may account for such effects.

No abstract

Objective: To assess the effects of mobilisation with movement (MWM) on pain, range of motion (ROM) and disability in the management of shoulder musculoskeletal disorders.Methods: Six databases PubMed (MEDLINE), CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, PEDro, Cochrane library, and Scopus were searched for randomized control trials (RCTs). The ROB 2 tool was used to determine risk-of-bias and the quality of the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analyses were performed for the sub-category of frozen shoulder and shoulder pain with movement dysfunction to evaluate the effect of MWM in isolation or in addition to exercise therapy and /or electrotherapy when compared with either no treatment, exercise therapy, electrotherapy alone or other types of manual therapy Results: Out of twenty-five studies, twenty-one were included in 8 separate meta-analyses for pain, ROM, and disability in the 2 sub-categories of shoulder disorders. For frozen shoulder, the addition of MWM significantly improved pain (SMD -1.23, 95% CI -1.96, -0.51), I 2 =89%), flexion ROM (MD -11.73, 95% CI -17.83, -5.64, I 2 =82%), abduction ROM (mean difference -13.14, 95% CI -19.42, -6.87, I 2 =85%) and disability (SMD -1.50, 95% CI (-2.30, -0.7, I 2 =89%). For shoulder pain with movement dysfunction the addition of MWM significantly improved pain (SMD -1.07, 95% CI -1.87, -0.26, I 2 =86%), flexion ROM (mean difference -18.48, 95% CI-32.43, -4.54, I 2 =90%), abduction 4.84, I 2 =97%) and disability (SMD -0.88, 95% CI -2.18, 0.43, I 2 =92%). The majority of studies were found to have a high risk of bias. Where appropriate, the clinical significance of the pooled differences was compared against Minimal Clinically Important Difference values.Discussion: MWM in addition to other forms of physiotherapy is associated with improved pain, mobility and function in patients with a range of shoulder musculoskeletal disorders including frozen shoulder. The effects were clinically meaningful for flexion and abduction ROM. However these findings need to be interpreted with caution due to the high levels of heterogeneity among included studies and inclusion of studies with a high risk of bias. The reasons for high levels of heterogeneity and risk of bias are explored.

No abstract