ArticleHuman brain mapping2016
Brain structural connectivity distinguishes patients at risk for cognitive decline after carotid interventions.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Progression in Vascular Cognitive Impairment: Pathogenesis, Neuroimaging Evaluation, and Treatment.Cell transplantation · 2019Article
- Age-Related Alterations in Electroencephalography Connectivity and Network Topology During n-Back Working Memory Task.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2018Article
- Brain Network Modularity Predicts Exercise-Related Executive Function Gains in Older Adults.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2017Article
- Increased Modularity of Resting State Networks Supports Improved Narrative Production in Aphasia Recovery.Brain connectivity · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
While brain connectivity analyses have been demonstrated to identify ill patients for a number of diseases, their ability to predict cognitive impairment after brain injury is not well established. Traditional post brain injury models, such as stroke, are limited for this evaluation because pre-injury brain connectivity patterns are infrequently available. Patients with severe carotid stenosis, in contrast, often undergo non-emergent revascularization surgery, allowing the collection of pre and post-operative imaging, may experience brain insult due to perioperative thrombotic/embolic infarcts or hypoperfusion, and can suffer post-operative cognitive decline. We hypothesized that a distributed function such as memory would be more resilient in patients with brains demonstrating higher degrees of modularity. To test this hypothesis, we analyzed preoperative structural connectivity graphs (using T1 and DWI MRI) for 34 patients that underwent carotid intervention, and evaluated differences in graph metrics using the Brain Connectivity Toolbox. We found that patients with lower binary component number, binary community number and weighted community number prior to surgery were at greater risk for developing cognitive decline. These findings highlight the promise of brain connectivity analyses to predict cognitive decline following brain injury and serve as a clinical decision support tool. Hum Brain Mapp 37:2185-2194, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.