Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30009477›Full record

ArticleHippocampus2019

Functional connectivity in category-selective brain networks after encoding predicts subsequent memory.

Jessica A Collins, Bradford C Dickerson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Hippocampus, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The role of the parahippocampal cortex in memory consolidation for scenes.Learning & memory (Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.) · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Memory consolidation as an adaptive process.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2021
    Review
  9. VTA and Anterior Hippocampus Target Dissociable Neocortical Networks for Post-Novelty Enhancements.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  10. Amyloid-Beta Influences MemoryFrontiers in aging neuroscience · 2021
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Perirhinal circuits for memory processing.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2019
    Review
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

2 authors.

Jessica A CollinsDepartment of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts.ORCID 0000-0002-0659-3762
Bradford C DickersonDepartment of Neurology, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, Massachusetts.

Funding

Medial temporal lobe subregions in aging, MCI and AD:Structural and functional MR01AG029411 · NIA · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI DICKERSON, BRADFORD C · 2007 to 2011
$2.3M
Neuromodulation of memory and language networks in Alzheimer's diseaseR21AG056958 · NIA · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI CAMPRODON, JOAN A, DICKERSON, BRADFORD C · 2017 to 2018
$467k
Ultrahigh-resolution in vivo and ex vivo MRI of human medial temporal lobeR21AG029840 · NIA · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI DICKERSON, BRADFORD C · 2008 to 2009
$404k
CSR NIH HHS AG029411AG029840NIA NIH HHS R01 AG029411NIA NIH HHS R21 AG029840NIA NIH HHS R21 AG056958NIH HHS AG029411NIH HHS AG029840
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Activity in category selective regions of the temporal and parietal lobes during encoding has been associated with subsequent memory for face and scene stimuli. Reactivation theories of memory consolidation predict that after encoding connectivity between these category-selective regions and the hippocampus should be modulated and predict recognition memory. However, support for this proposal has been limited in humans. Here, participants completed a resting-state functional MRI (fMRI) scan, followed by face- and place-encoding tasks, followed by another resting-state fMRI scan during which they were asked to think about the stimuli they had previously encountered. Individual differences in face recognition memory were predicted by the degree to which connectivity between face-responsive regions of the fusiform gyrus and perirhinal cortex increased following the face-encoding task. In contrast, individual differences in scene recognition were predicted by connectivity between the hippocampus and a scene-selective region of the retrosplenial cortex before and after the place-encoding task. Our results provide novel evidence for category specificity in the neural mechanisms supporting memory consolidation.

Indexed as

AdultBrainFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMemory ConsolidationNerve NetPattern Recognition, VisualYoung Adultconsolidation, episodic memory, hippocampus, Perirhinal cortex

Identifiers

PMID30009477
PMCPMC6525339

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.