Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30367727›Full record

ArticleHuman brain mapping2021

Comparison of EEG microstates with resting state fMRI and FDG-PET measures in the default mode network via simultaneously recorded trimodal (PET/MR/EEG) data.

Ravichandran Rajkumar, Ezequiel Farrher, Jörg Mauler, Praveen Sripad, Cláudia Régio Brambilla, Elena Rota Kops, Jürgen Scheins, Jürgen Dammers, Christoph Lerche, Karl-Josef Langen and 4 more

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Human brain mapping, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

14 authors.

Ravichandran RajkumarInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-5875-5316
Ezequiel FarrherInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2902-8667
Jörg MaulerInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4937-0355
Praveen SripadInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6361-2571
Cláudia Régio BrambillaInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Elena Rota KopsInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0959-9457
Jürgen ScheinsInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Jürgen DammersInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1526-6592
Christoph LercheInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2749-2108
Karl-Josef LangenInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1101-5075
Hans HerzogInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.
Bharat BiswalDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, New Jersey.
N Jon ShahInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-8151-6169
Irene NeunerInstitute of Neuroscience and Medicine 4, INM-4, Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5164-8873

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Simultaneous trimodal positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance imaging/electroencephalography (PET/MRI/EEG) resting state (rs) brain data were acquired from 10 healthy male volunteers. The rs-functional MRI (fMRI) metrics, such as regional homogeneity (ReHo), degree centrality (DC) and fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations (fALFFs), as well as 2-[18F]fluoro-2-desoxy-d-glucose (FDG)-PET standardised uptake value (SUV), were calculated and the measures were extracted from the default mode network (DMN) regions of the brain. Similarly, four microstates for each subject, showing the diverse functional states of the whole brain via topographical variations due to global field power (GFP), were estimated from artefact-corrected EEG signals. In this exploratory analysis, the GFP of microstates was nonparametrically compared to rs-fMRI metrics and FDG-PET SUV measured in the DMN of the brain. The rs-fMRI metrics (ReHO, fALFF) and FDG-PET SUV did not show any significant correlations with any of the microstates. The DC metric showed a significant positive correlation with microstate C (r

Indexed as

Cerebral CortexDefault Mode NetworkAdultBiomarkersConnectomeElectroencephalographyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMultimodal ImagingPositron-Emission TomographyBiomarkers18F-FDGbiomarkerselectroencephalographyfMRImultimodal imagingpositron emission tomography

Identifiers

PMID30367727
PMCPMC8356993

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.