Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27504629›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2016

Modeling of Large-Scale Functional Brain Networks Based on Structural Connectivity from DTI: Comparison with EEG Derived Phase Coupling Networks and Evaluation of Alternative Methods along the Modeling Path.

Holger Finger, Marlene Bönstrup, Bastian Cheng, Arnaud Messé, Claus Hilgetag, Götz Thomalla, Christian Gerloff, Peter König

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 58 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed
–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

58 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Shared spatial and temporal principles govern connectome dynamics across timescales.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

Holger FingerInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Marlene BönstrupDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Bastian ChengDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Arnaud MesséDepartment of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Claus HilgetagDepartment of Computational Neuroscience, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2129-8910
Götz ThomallaDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Christian GerloffDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Peter KönigInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we investigate if phase-locking of fast oscillatory activity relies on the anatomical skeleton and if simple computational models informed by structural connectivity can help further to explain missing links in the structure-function relationship. We use diffusion tensor imaging data and alpha band-limited EEG signal recorded in a group of healthy individuals. Our results show that about 23.4% of the variance in empirical networks of resting-state functional connectivity is explained by the underlying white matter architecture. Simulating functional connectivity using a simple computational model based on the structural connectivity can increase the match to 45.4%. In a second step, we use our modeling framework to explore several technical alternatives along the modeling path. First, we find that an augmentation of homotopic connections in the structural connectivity matrix improves the link to functional connectivity while a correction for fiber distance slightly decreases the performance of the model. Second, a more complex computational model based on Kuramoto oscillators leads to a slight improvement of the model fit. Third, we show that the comparison of modeled and empirical functional connectivity at source level is much more specific for the underlying structural connectivity. However, different source reconstruction algorithms gave comparable results. Of note, as the fourth finding, the model fit was much better if zero-phase lag components were preserved in the empirical functional connectome, indicating a considerable amount of functionally relevant synchrony taking place with near zero or zero-phase lag. The combination of the best performing alternatives at each stage in the pipeline results in a model that explains 54.4% of the variance in the empirical EEG functional connectivity. Our study shows that large-scale brain circuits of fast neural network synchrony strongly rely upon the structural connectome and simple computational models of neural activity can explain missing links in the structure-function relationship.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAlgorithmsComputational BiologyDiffusion Tensor ImagingElectroencephalographyHumansNerve Net

Identifiers

PMID27504629
PMCPMC4978387

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.