Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27554527›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2017

Retinotopic patterns of functional connectivity between V1 and large-scale brain networks during resting fixation.

Joseph C Griffis, Abdurahman S Elkhetali, Wesley K Burge, Richard H Chen, Anthony D Bowman, Jerzy P Szaflarski, Kristina M Visscher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Effects of Useful Field of View Training on Brain Activity and Connectivity.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2019
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. WhatFrontiers in neural circuits · 2022
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

7 authors.

Joseph C GriffisDepartment of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States.
Abdurahman S ElkhetaliDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States.
Wesley K BurgeDepartment of Psychology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States.
Richard H ChenDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States.
Anthony D BowmanDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States.
Jerzy P SzaflarskiDepartment of Neurology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States.
Kristina M VisscherDepartment of Neurobiology, University of Alabama at Birmingham, United States. Electronic address: kmv@uab.edu.

Funding

UAB Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS)UL1TR001417 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI KIMBERLY, ROBERT P. · 2015 to 2018
$31.4M
Visual Phenotyping CoreP30EY003039 · NEI · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI Oliver W Gramlich · 1985 to 2026
$16.9M
UAB Center for Clinical and Translational Science (CCTS) UL1UL1TR000165 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI KIMBERLY, ROBERT P. · 2012 to 2013
$9.6M
Pilot CoreP30AG022838 · NIA · UNIVERSITY OF ALABAMA AT BIRMINGHAM · PI BALL, KARLENE K · 2003 to 2020
$5.7M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000165NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001417NEI NIH HHS P30 EY003039NIA NIH HHS P30 AG022838
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Psychophysical and neurobiological evidence suggests that central and peripheral vision are specialized for different functions. This specialization of function might be expected to lead to differences in the large-scale functional interactions of early cortical areas that represent central and peripheral visual space. Here, we characterize differences in whole-brain functional connectivity among sectors in primary visual cortex (V1) corresponding to central, near-peripheral, and far-peripheral vision during resting fixation. Importantly, our analyses reveal that eccentricity sectors in V1 have different functional connectivity with non-visual areas associated with large-scale brain networks. Regions associated with the fronto-parietal control network are most strongly connected with central sectors of V1, regions associated with the cingulo-opercular control network are most strongly connected with near-peripheral sectors of V1, and regions associated with the default mode and auditory networks are most strongly connected with far-peripheral sectors of V1. Additional analyses suggest that similar patterns are present during eyes-closed rest. These results suggest that different types of visual information may be prioritized by large-scale brain networks with distinct functional profiles, and provide insights into how the small-scale functional specialization within early visual regions such as V1 relates to the large-scale organization of functionally distinct whole-brain networks.

Indexed as

AdultBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleNeural PathwaysPhotic StimulationVisual CortexVisual PathwaysVisual PerceptionYoung AdultAttentionEccentricityfMRIPrimary visual cortexTop-down control

Identifiers

PMID27554527
PMCPMC5318284

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.