Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28230845›Full record

ReviewNature neuroscience2017

Dynamic models of large-scale brain activity.

Michael Breakspear

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 517 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
517citing 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

517 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Rhythmic stimulation elicits multiple, concurrent neural responses.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Spatially structured heterogeneity shapes large-scale cortical dynamics in a model of the human cortex.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Cognitive Processing and EEG Complexity.Entropy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  20. Dynamical Cognitive Science! Wherefore Art Thou?Topics in cognitive science · 2026
    Article

457 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

1 author.

Michael BreakspearQIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Herston, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Movement, cognition and perception arise from the collective activity of neurons within cortical circuits and across large-scale systems of the brain. While the causes of single neuron spikes have been understood for decades, the processes that support collective neural behavior in large-scale cortical systems are less clear and have been at times the subject of contention. Modeling large-scale brain activity with nonlinear dynamical systems theory allows the integration of experimental data from multiple modalities into a common framework that facilitates prediction, testing and possible refutation. This work reviews the core assumptions that underlie this computational approach, the methodological framework that fosters the translation of theory into the laboratory, and the emerging body of supporting evidence. While substantial challenges remain, evidence supports the view that collective, nonlinear dynamics are central to adaptive cortical activity. Likewise, aberrant dynamic processes appear to underlie a number of brain disorders.

Indexed as

Models, NeurologicalAnimalsBrainCognitionHumansMovementNerve NetNeurons

Identifiers

PMID28230845

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.