Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27880785›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2016

Individual Differences in Dynamic Functional Brain Connectivity across the Human Lifespan.

Elizabeth N Davison, Benjamin O Turner, Kimberly J Schlesinger, Michael B Miller, Scott T Grafton, Danielle S Bassett, Jean M Carlson

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 28 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. From calcium imaging to graph topology.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Application of Graph Theory to Assess Static and Dynamic Brain Connectivity: Approaches for Building Brain Graphs.Proceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers · 2018
    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

7 authors.

Elizabeth N DavisonDepartment of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of America.
Benjamin O TurnerDepartment of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
Kimberly J SchlesingerDepartment of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3793-6748
Michael B MillerDepartment of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.
Scott T GraftonDepartment of Psychological & Brain Sciences, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4015-3151
Danielle S BassettDepartment of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6183-4493
Jean M CarlsonDepartment of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, California, United States of America.

Funding

Linguistic and NonLinguistic Functions of Frontal CortexR01DC009209 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI THOMPSONSCHILL, SHARON L · 2008 to 2018
$5.2M
CRCNS: US-France Modeling & Predicting BCI Learning from Dynamic NetworksR01HD086888 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BASSETT, DANIELLE SMITH · 2015 to 2018
$506k
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD086888NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC009209
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual differences in brain functional networks may be related to complex personal identifiers, including health, age, and ability. Dynamic network theory has been used to identify properties of dynamic brain function from fMRI data, but the majority of analyses and findings remain at the level of the group. Here, we apply hypergraph analysis, a method from dynamic network theory, to quantify individual differences in brain functional dynamics. Using a summary metric derived from the hypergraph formalism-hypergraph cardinality-we investigate individual variations in two separate, complementary data sets. The first data set ("multi-task") consists of 77 individuals engaging in four consecutive cognitive tasks. We observe that hypergraph cardinality exhibits variation across individuals while remaining consistent within individuals between tasks; moreover, the analysis of one of the memory tasks revealed a marginally significant correspondence between hypergraph cardinality and age. This finding motivated a similar analysis of the second data set ("age-memory"), in which 95 individuals, aged 18-75, performed a memory task with a similar structure to the multi-task memory task. With the increased age range in the age-memory data set, the correlation between hypergraph cardinality and age correspondence becomes significant. We discuss these results in the context of the well-known finding linking age with network structure, and suggest that hypergraph analysis should serve as a useful tool in furthering our understanding of the dynamic network structure of the brain.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAdaptation, PhysiologicalAdolescentAdultAgedBrainCognitionComputer SimulationConnectomeFemaleHumansLongevityMaleMiddle AgedNerve NetNeural Pathways

Identifiers

PMID27880785
PMCPMC5120784

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.