Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Jul 24.
Published in final edited form as: Pain. 2010 Dec 15;152(3):498–506. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2010.10.017

Table 2.

Characteristics of strokes in subjects with strokes but without hemi-neglect. Column 5 indicates the presence of errors > 1% which were non-significant errors (< 10%, see Section 2.5).

Identifier Age, sex, schooling Stroke Other conditions Stroke signs Errors on tests of neglect
and extinction
2:1 86, F, 12 Large frontal opercular MCA AVR CAD CABG hyperlip Lt FAL weak Bisect error2%.
2:2 69,M, 12 Large watershed CAD, pancreatic CA, DM, HBP Lt AL weak CAD sev HBP Bisect error 2%.
2:3 59, M, 15 MCA infarct Hbp glaucoma hyperchol Lt FAL numb Bisect error 1.5%
2:4 25, F, 14 Large MCA Antiphospholip Synd,MI ITP FAL numbness & weakness Cancel vis 7% Bisect error 1.6%
2:5 67, M, 10 Extensive small infarts Hbp ARF, obesity gout Right arm weak Cancel vis 7% Bisect error 6%
2:6 45, M, Large left MCA HBP. DM, sinus brady Right FAL weakness (3–4/5) Cancel visual 6% Bisect error 3%
2:7 62, M Thalamic capsular HBP, Lt FAL weakness
2:8 75, m, 15 Bilateral white matter and Lt deep frontal AF, HBP, DM, AI Right FAL weakness numbness Bisect error 1.5%
2:9 79,M. 15 Lt fronto-insular stroke DM, HBP, hypercholest Right AL weakness
2:10 57, F Left thalamic capsular DM, HBP, obesity Right AL weakness, numbness Bisect error 6%
2:11 74, F Lt BG parietal HBP, MR, AF hypercholest FA weakness