Laureys, S., Pellas, F., Van Eeckhout, P., Ghorbel, S., Schnakers, C., Perrin, F. et al. (2005). Progress in Brain Research 150:495–511. doi:10.1016/S0079-6123(05)50034-7.
Not read. The summary is drawn from the abstract or from what the work is standardly cited for. A reading should check it first.
Why this is here
For CASE-107: the standard review for the forms of locked-in syndrome the case distinguishes (classic, incomplete, total). Not read, and no lawful copy was reached. The forms do not depend on it: Bruno et al. (LIT-1183, read in NOTE-961), with Laureys as senior author, define them (“‘classic’ LIS is characterised by quadriplegia and aphonia with coded communication by vertical eye movement or blinking; ‘incomplete’ LIS patients have remnants of voluntary motion other than vertical eye movement; and ‘total’ LIS is defined by complete immobility, including all eye movements”) and cite them to Bauer, Gerstenbrand and Rumpl (1979), not to this review. What this review says of cognition in LIS is not known to the record.