Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30559531›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers2018

Applications of community detection techniques to brain graphs: Algorithmic considerations and implications for neural function.

Javier O Garcia, Arian Ashourvan, Sarah F Muldoon, Jean M Vettel, Danielle S Bassett

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the IEEE. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing 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

30 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. A practical two-sample test for weighted random graphs.Journal of applied statistics · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Dual communities in spatial networks.Nature communications · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  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

5 authors.

Javier O GarciaU.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 USA.
Arian AshourvanU.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 USA.
Sarah F MuldoonU.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 USA.
Jean M VettelU.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 USA.
Danielle S BassettU.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 USA.

Funding

Longitudinal Mapping of Network Development Underlying Executive Dysfunction in AdolescenceR01MH113550 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Danielle Smith Bassett, Theodore Satterthwaite · 2018 to 2026
$6.9M
Linguistic and NonLinguistic Functions of Frontal CortexR01DC009209 · NIDCD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI THOMPSONSCHILL, SHARON L · 2008 to 2018
$5.2M
Longitudinal multi-modal neuroimaging of irritability in youthR01MH107703 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SATTERTHWAITE, THEODORE · 2015 to 2018
$2.6M
Virtual Resection to Treat EpilepsyR01NS099348 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BASSETT, DANIELLE SMITH, LITT, BRIAN · 2016 to 2019
$2.3M
Brain Network Mechanisms of Instructed LearningR01MH109520 · NIMH · RUTGERS THE STATE UNIV OF NJ NEWARK · PI COLE, MICHAEL WILLIAM · 2016 to 2020
$2.0M
Multimodal brain maturation indices modulating psychopathology and neurocognitionR01MH107235 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI GUR, RUBEN C. · 2015 to 2017
$1.5M
Evolution of the Linked Architecture of Network Control and Executive Function in AdolescenceR21MH106799 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BASSETT, DANIELLE SMITH, SATTERTHWAITE, THEODORE · 2016 to 2017
$515k
CRCNS: US-France Modeling & Predicting BCI Learning from Dynamic NetworksR01HD086888 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI BASSETT, DANIELLE SMITH · 2015 to 2018
$506k
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD086888NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC009209NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH107235NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH107703NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH109520NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH113550NIMH NIH HHS R21 MH106799NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS099348
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The human brain can be represented as a graph in which neural units such as cells or small volumes of tissue are heterogeneously connected to one another through structural or functional links. Brain graphs are parsimonious representations of neural systems that have begun to offer fundamental insights into healthy human cognition, as well as its alteration in disease. A critical open question in network neuroscience lies in how neural units cluster into densely interconnected groups that can provide the coordinated activity that is characteristic of perception, action, and adaptive behaviors. Tools that have proven particularly useful for addressing this question are community detection approaches, which can identify communities or modules: groups of neural units that are densely interconnected with other units in their own group but sparsely interconnected with units in other groups. In this paper, we describe a common community detection algorithm known as

Indexed as

brain networkscommunity detectionmodularitymulti-layermulti-scale

Identifiers

PMID30559531
PMCPMC6294140

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.