Shalini Narayana

Dr. Shalini Narayana

Neuroscience Institute, Le Bonheur Children's Hospital51 North Dunlap St., Outpatient Center - Suite 320Memphis, TN 38105, USA
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

16Years (2011-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 January 2011 in Frontiers in Psychology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
RGRyan J. Giuliano
Ryan J. Giuliano
PPPeter Q. Pfordresher
Peter Q. Pfordresher
ESEmily M. Stanley
Emily M. Stanley
SNShalini Narayana
Shalini Narayana
NWNicole Y. Y. Wicha
Nicole Y. Y. Wicha
Native tone language experience has been linked with alterations in the production and perception of pitch in language, as well as with the brain response to linguistic and non-linguistic tones. Here we use two experiments to address whether these changes apply to the discrimination of simple pitch changes and pitch intervals. Event related potentials (ERPs) were recorded from native Mandarin speakers and a control group during a same/different task with pairs of pure tones differing only in pitch height, and with pure tone pairs differing only in interval distance. Behaviorally, Mandarin speakers were more accurate than controls at detecting both pitch and interval changes, showing a sensitivity to small pitch changes and interval distances that was absent in the control group. Converging evidence from ERPs obtained during the same tasks revealed an earlier response to change relative to no-change trials in Mandarin speakers, as well as earlier differentiation of trials by change direction relative to controls. These findings illustrate the cross-domain influence of language experience on the perception of pitch, suggesting that the native use of tonal pitch contours in language leads to a general enhancement in the acuity of pitch representations.

1 September 2016 in Brain Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
MKMarina Kilintari
Marina Kilintari
SNShalini Narayana
Shalini Narayana
ABAbbas Babajani-Feremi
Abbas Babajani-Feremi
RRRoozbeh Rezaie
Roozbeh Rezaie
APAndrew C. Papanicolaou
Andrew C. Papanicolaou
The aim of this study was to identify brain regions involved in motor imagery and differentiate two alternative strategies in its implementation: imagining a motor act using kinesthetic or visual imagery. Fourteen adults were precisely instructed and trained on how to imagine themselves or others perform a movement sequence, with the aim of promoting kinesthetic and visual imagery, respectively, in the context of an fMRI experiment using block design. We found that neither modality of motor imagery elicits activation of the primary motor cortex and that each of the two modalities involves activation of the premotor area which is also activated during action execution and action observation conditions, as well as of the supplementary motor area. Interestingly, the visual and the posterior cingulate cortices show reduced BOLD signal during both imagery conditions. Our results indicate that the networks of regions activated in kinesthetic and visual imagery of motor sequences show a substantial, while not complete overlap, and that the two forms of motor imagery lead to a differential suppression of visual areas.

1 January 2014 in NeuroImage
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SNShalini Narayana
Shalini Narayana
WZWei Zhang
Wei Zhang
WRWilliam Rogers
William Rogers
CSCasey Strickland
Casey Strickland
CFCrystal Franklin
Crystal Franklin
PFPeter T. Fox
Peter T. Fox

23 October 2014 in Journal of Child Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SNShalini Narayana
Shalini Narayana
APAndrew C. Papanicolaou
Andrew C. Papanicolaou
AMAmy McGregor
Amy McGregor
FBFrederick A. Boop
Frederick A. Boop
JWJames W. Wheless
James W. Wheless
Noninvasive brain stimulation is now an accepted technique that is used as a diagnostic aid and in the treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders in adults, and is being increasingly used in children. In this review, we will discuss the basic principles and safety of one noninvasive brain stimulation method, transcranial magnetic stimulation. Improvements in the spatial accuracy of transcranial magnetic stimulation are described in the context of image-guided transcranial magnetic stimulation. The article describes and provides examples of the current clinical applications of transcranial magnetic stimulation in children as an aid in the diagnosis and treatment of neuropsychiatric disorders and discusses future potential applications. Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a noninvasive tool that is safe for use in children and adolescents for functional mapping and treatment, and for many children it aids in the preoperative evaluation and the risk-benefit decision making.

19 May 2021 in Frontiers in Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
SNShalini Narayana
Shalini Narayana
SGSavannah K. Gibbs
Savannah K. Gibbs
SFStephen P. Fulton
Stephen P. Fulton
AMAmy Lee McGregor
Amy Lee McGregor
BMBasanagoud Mudigoudar
Basanagoud Mudigoudar
JWJames W. Wheless
James W. Wheless
Accurate presurgical mapping of motor, speech, and language cortices, while crucial for neurosurgical planning and minimizing post-operative functional deficits, is challenging in young children with neurological disease. In such children, both invasive (cortical stimulation mapping) and non-invasive functional mapping imaging methods (MEG, fMRI) have limited success, often leading to delayed surgery or adverse post-surgical outcomes. We therefore examined the clinical utility of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in young children who require functional mapping. In a retrospective chart review of TMS studies performed on children with refractory epilepsy or a brain tumor, at our institution, we identified 47 mapping sessions in 36 children 3 years of age or younger, in whom upper and lower extremity motor mapping was attempted; and 13 children 5–6 years old in whom language mapping, using a naming paradigm, was attempted. The primary hand motor cortex was identified in at least one hemisphere in 33 of 36 patients, and in both hemispheres in 27 children. In 17 children, primary leg motor cortex was also successfully identified. The language cortices in temporal regions were successfully mapped in 11 of 13 patients, and in six of them language cortices in frontal regions were also mapped, with most children (n = 5) showing right hemisphere dominance for expressive language. Ten children had a seizure that was consistent with their clinical semiology during or immediately following TMS, none of which required intervention or impeded completion of mapping. Using TMS, both normal motor, speech, and language developmental patterns and apparent disease induced reorganization were demonstrated in this young cohort. The successful localization of motor, speech, and language cortices in young children improved the understanding of the risk-benefit ratio prior to surgery and facilitated surgical planning aimed at preserving motor, speech, and language functions. Post-operatively, motor function was preserved or improved in nine out of 11 children who underwent surgery, as was language function in all seven children who had surgery for lesions near eloquent cortices. We provide feasibility data that TMS is a safe, reliable, and effective tool to map eloquent cortices in young children.

1 January 2015 in Pediatric Neurology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SNShalini Narayana
Shalini Narayana
RRRoozbeh Rezaie
Roozbeh Rezaie
SMSamuel S. McAfee
Samuel S. McAfee
ACAsim F. Choudhri
Asim F. Choudhri
ABAbbas Babajani-Feremi
Abbas Babajani-Feremi
APAndrew C. Papanicolaou
Andrew C. Papanicolaou