Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24500505›Full record

ReviewNeuropsychology review2014

Brain networks in schizophrenia.

Martijn P van den Heuvel, Alex Fornito

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Neuropsychology review, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 256 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
256citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

256 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

196 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Martijn P van den HeuvelDepartment of Psychiatry, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3508 GA, Utrecht, PO Box 85500, The Netherlands, m.p.vandenheuvel@umcutrecht.nl.
Alex Fornito

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Schizophrenia--a severe psychiatric condition characterized by hallucinations, delusions, loss of initiative and cognitive function--is hypothesized to result from abnormal anatomical neural connectivity and a consequent decoupling of the brain's integrative thought processes. The rise of in vivo neuroimaging techniques has refueled the formulation of dysconnectivity hypotheses, linking schizophrenia to abnormal structural and functional connectivity in the brain at both microscopic and macroscopic levels. Over the past few years, advances in high-field structural and functional neuroimaging techniques have made it increasingly feasible to reconstruct comprehensive maps of the macroscopic neural wiring system of the human brain, know as the connectome. In parallel, advances in network science and graph theory have improved our ability to study the spatial and topological organizational layout of such neural connectivity maps in detail. Combined, the field of neural connectomics has created a novel platform that provides a deeper understanding of the overall organization of brain wiring, its relation to healthy brain function and human cognition, and conversely, how brain disorders such as schizophrenia arise from abnormal brain network wiring and dynamics. In this review we discuss recent findings of connectomic studies in schizophrenia that examine how the disorder relates to disruptions of brain connectivity.

Indexed as

BrainBrain MappingConnectomeHumansNeural PathwaysSchizophrenia

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.