Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27001844›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2016

Direction of information flow in large-scale resting-state networks is frequency-dependent.

Arjan Hillebrand, Prejaas Tewarie, Edwin van Dellen, Meichen Yu, Ellen W S Carbo, Linda Douw, Alida A Gouw, Elisabeth C W van Straaten, Cornelis J Stam

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 193 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
193citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

193 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Advances in causal discovery methods for ecological time series.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

133 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

9 authors.

Arjan HillebrandDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; a.hillebrand@vumc.nl.
Prejaas TewarieDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
Edwin van DellenDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Psychiatry, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands;
Meichen YuDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
Ellen W S CarboDepartment of Anatomy and Neurosciences, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
Linda DouwDepartment of Anatomy and Neurosciences, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Radiology, Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, MA 02129;
Alida A GouwDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Alzheimer Center and Department of Neurology, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
Elisabeth C W van StraatenDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Nutricia Advanced Medical Nutrition, Nutricia Research, 3584 CT Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cornelis J StamDepartment of Clinical Neurophysiology and Magnetoencephalography Center, VU University Medical Center, 1081 HV Amsterdam, The Netherlands;

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Normal brain function requires interactions between spatially separated, and functionally specialized, macroscopic regions, yet the directionality of these interactions in large-scale functional networks is unknown. Magnetoencephalography was used to determine the directionality of these interactions, where directionality was inferred from time series of beamformer-reconstructed estimates of neuronal activation, using a recently proposed measure of phase transfer entropy. We observed well-organized posterior-to-anterior patterns of information flow in the higher-frequency bands (alpha1, alpha2, and beta band), dominated by regions in the visual cortex and posterior default mode network. Opposite patterns of anterior-to-posterior flow were found in the theta band, involving mainly regions in the frontal lobe that were sending information to a more distributed network. Many strong information senders in the theta band were also frequent receivers in the alpha2 band, and vice versa. Our results provide evidence that large-scale resting-state patterns of information flow in the human brain form frequency-dependent reentry loops that are dominated by flow from parieto-occipital cortex to integrative frontal areas in the higher-frequency bands, which is mirrored by a theta band anterior-to-posterior flow.

Indexed as

Brain MappingFrontal LobeHumansMagnetoencephalographyNerve NetNeural PathwaysOccipital Lobeatlas-based beamforminginformation flowmagnetoencephalographyphase transfer entropyresting-state networks

Identifiers

PMID27001844
PMCPMC4833227

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.