Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29118218›Full record

ReviewThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2017

Consciousness Regained: Disentangling Mechanisms, Brain Systems, and Behavioral Responses.

Johan F Storm, Mélanie Boly, Adenauer G Casali, Marcello Massimini, Umberto Olcese, Cyriel M A Pennartz, Melanie Wilke

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing 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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Is Consciousness First in Virtual Reality?Frontiers in psychology · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  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.

Johan F StormDivision of Physiology, Department of Molecular Medicine, Institute of Basal Medical Sciences, University of Oslo, Oslo, 0317, Norway, j.f.storm@medisin.uio.no.ORCID 0000-0002-8551-4865
Mélanie BolyDepartment of Neurology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, 53705.ORCID 0000-0001-9584-0907
Adenauer G CasaliInstitute of Science and Technology, Federal University of São Paulo, São José dos Campos, SP, 12231-280, Brazil.ORCID 0000-0001-7024-9029
Marcello MassiminiDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences Luigi Sacco, University of Milan, Milan, 20157, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2271-957X
Umberto OlceseCognitive and Systems Neuroscience Group, Swammerdam Institute for Life Sciences and.ORCID 0000-0001-6968-2503
Cyriel M A PennartzCognitive and Systems Neuroscience Group, Swammerdam Institute for Life Sciences and.ORCID 0000-0001-8328-1175
Melanie WilkeDepartment of Cognitive Neurology, University Medicine Goettingen, Goettingen, 37075, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-2883-6593

Funding

Characterizing epileptic spikes as travelling waves using high-density EEGR03NS096379 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON · PI BOLY, MELANIE · 2016 to 2017
$153k
NINDS NIH HHS R03 NS096379
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

How consciousness (experience) arises from and relates to material brain processes (the "mind-body problem") has been pondered by thinkers for centuries, and is regarded as among the deepest unsolved problems in science, with wide-ranging theoretical, clinical, and ethical implications. Until the last few decades, this was largely seen as a philosophical topic, but not widely accepted in mainstream neuroscience. Since the 1980s, however, novel methods and theoretical advances have yielded remarkable results, opening up the field for scientific and clinical progress. Since a seminal paper by Crick and Koch (1998) claimed that a science of consciousness should first search for its neural correlates (NCC), a variety of correlates have been suggested, including both content-specific NCCs, determining particular phenomenal components within an experience, and the full NCC, the neural substrates supporting entire conscious experiences. In this review, we present recent progress on theoretical, experimental, and clinical issues. Specifically, we (1) review methodological advances that are important for dissociating conscious experience from related enabling and executive functions, (2) suggest how critically reconsidering the role of the frontal cortex may further delineate NCCs, (3) advocate the need for general, objective, brain-based measures of the capacity for consciousness that are independent of sensory processing and executive functions, and (4) show how animal studies can reveal population and network phenomena of relevance for understanding mechanisms of consciousness.

Indexed as

BehaviorConsciousnessAnimalsBehavior, AnimalBrainConsciousness DisordersHumansPsychophysiologybrain complexityconsciousnesscontent-specific NCCfunctional connectivityneural correlates of consciousnessno-report paradigmPerturbational Complexity Indexunresponsive wakefulnessvegetative state

Identifiers

PMID29118218
PMCPMC5678021

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.