Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30914933›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2019

A Non-cognitive Behavioral Model for Interpreting Functional Neuroimaging Studies.

Robert G Shulman, Douglas L Rothman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 34% of its field
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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Robert G ShulmanMagnetic Resonance Research Center, Department of Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States.
Douglas L RothmanMagnetic Resonance Research Center, Department of Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, United States.
Yale University · US

Funding

13C MRS Studies of Brain Mitochondrial Metabolism in Insulin ResistanceR01NS087568 · NINDS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI PETERSEN, KITT F, ROTHMAN, DOUGLAS LYLE · 2014 to 2018
$2.1M
MRS validation of computational metabolic modeling of human brain function to determine energetic disruptions underlying fMRI-derived functional connectivity in degenerative or psychiatric disordersR01NS100106 · NINDS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI HYDER, DEWAN SYED FAHMEED, ROTHMAN, DOUGLAS LYLE · 2017 to 2021
$959k
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS087568NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS100106
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The dominant model for interpreting brain imaging experiments, which we refer to as the Standard Cognitive Model (SCM), assumes that the brain is organized in support of mental processes that control behavior. However, functional neuroimaging experiments of cognitive tasks have not shown clear anatomic segregation between mental processes originally proposed by this model. This failing has been blamed on limitations in imaging technology and non-linearity in the brain's implementation of these processes. However, the validity of the underlying cognitive models used to describe the brain has rarely been questioned or directly tested against imaging results. We propose an alternative model of brain function, that we term the Non-cognitive Behavioral Model (NBM), which correlates observed human behavior directly with measured brain activity without making assumptions about intervening cognitive processes. Our model derives from behavioral psychology but is extended to include brain activity, in addition to behavior, as observables. A further extension is the role of neuroplasticity, as opposed to innate cognitive processes, in developing the brain's support of cognitive behavior. We present the theoretical basis with which the SCM maps cognitive processes onto functional magnetic resonance and positron emission tomography images and compare and contrast with the NBM. We also describe how the NBM can be used experimentally to study how the brain supports behavior. Two applications are presented that support the usefulness of the NBM. In one, the NBM use of the total functional imaging signal (not just the differences between states) provides a stronger correlation of neural activity with the behavioral state of consciousness than the SCM approach in both anesthesia and coma. The second example reviews studies of facial and object recognition that provide evidence for the NBM proposal that neuroplasticity and experience play key roles in the brain's support of recognition and other behaviors. The conclusions regarding neuroplasticity are then generalized to explain the incomplete functional segregation observed in the application of the SCM to neuroimaging.

Indexed as

behavioral psychologycognitive psychologyconsciousnessfunctional magnet resonance imagingneuroenergeticsobject recognition

Identifiers

PMID30914933
PMCPMC6421518
OpenAlexW2922338457

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.