Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27211526›Full record

ReviewNeuroscience and biobehavioral reviews2016

Different involvement of subregions within dorsal premotor and medial frontal cortex for pro- and antisaccades.

Edna C Cieslik, Isabelle Seidler, Angela R Laird, Peter T Fox, Simon B Eickhoff

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroscience and biobehavioral reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Age differences in predicting working memory performance from network-based functional connectivity.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2020
    Article
  20. Review
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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Edna C CieslikInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-1) Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany. Electronic address: e.cieslik@fz-juelich.de.
Isabelle SeidlerInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Angela R LairdDepartment of Physics, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA; Department of Psychology, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
Peter T FoxResearch Imaging Institute, University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, TX, USA; Research Service, South Texas Veterans Administration Medical Center, San Antonio, TX, USA; State Key Laboratory for Brain and Cognitive Sciences, University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
Simon B EickhoffInstitute of Clinical Neuroscience and Medical Psychology, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University, Düsseldorf, Germany; Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-1) Research Centre Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf · DEFlorida International University · USUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs · US

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The antisaccade task has been widely used to investigate cognitive action control. While the general network for saccadic eye movements is well defined, the exact location of eye fields within the frontal cortex strongly varies between studies. It is unknown whether this inconsistency reflects spatial uncertainty or is the result of different involvement of subregions for specific aspects of eye movement control. The aim of the present study was to examine functional differentiations within the frontal cortex by integrating results from neuroimaging studies analyzing pro- and antisaccade behavior using meta-analyses. The results provide evidence for a differential functional specialization of neighboring oculomotor frontal regions, with lateral frontal eye fields (FEF) and supplementary eye field (SEF) more often involved in prosaccades while medial FEF and anterior midcingulate cortex (aMCC) revealed consistent stronger involvement for antisaccades. This dissociation was furthermore mirrored by functional connectivity analyses showing that the lateral FEF and SEF are embedded in a motor output network, while medial FEF and aMCC are integrated in a multiple demand network.

Indexed as

Frontal LobeSaccadesBrain MappingHumansVisual FieldsaMCCEye movementsfMRIFunctional connectivity (FC)Lateral FEFMedial FEFMeta-analysisMeta-analytic connectivity modeling (MACM)Resting stateSEF

Identifiers

PMID27211526
PMCPMC5003685
OpenAlexW2396589870

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.