ArticleBrain connectivity2018
Quantifying Differences Between Passive and Task-Evoked Intrinsic Functional Connectivity in a Large-Scale Brain Simulation.
Article in Brain connectivity, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brain mechanisms of mental processing: from evoked and spontaneous brain activities to enactive brain activity.Psychoradiology · 2023Review
- Reorganization of the functional connectome from rest to a visual perception task in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.Psychiatry research. Neuroimaging · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Establishing a connection between intrinsic and task-evoked brain activities is critical because it would provide a way to map task-related brain regions in patients unable to comply with such tasks. A crucial question within this realm is to what extent the execution of a cognitive task affects the intrinsic activity of brain regions not involved in the task. Computational models can be useful to answer this question because they allow us to distinguish task from nontask neural elements while giving us the effects of task execution on nontask regions of interest at the neuroimaging level. The quantification of those effects in a computational model would represent a step toward elucidating the intrinsic versus task-evoked connection. In this study we used computational modeling and graph theoretical metrics to quantify changes in intrinsic functional brain connectivity due to task execution. We used our large-scale neural modeling framework to embed a computational model of visual short-term memory into an empirically derived connectome. We simulated a neuroimaging study consisting of 10 subjects performing passive fixation (PF), passive viewing (PV), and delayed match-to-sample (DMS) tasks. We used the simulated blood oxygen level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging time series to calculate functional connectivity (FC) matrices and used those matrices to compute several graph theoretical measures. After determining that the simulated graph theoretical measures were largely consistent with experiments, we were able to quantify the differences between the graph metrics of the PF condition and those of the PV and DMS conditions. Thus, we show that we can use graph theoretical methods applied to simulated brain networks to aid in the quantification of changes in intrinsic brain FC during task execution. Our results represent a step toward establishing a connection between intrinsic and task-related brain activities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.