Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31870495›Full record

ReviewBiological psychiatry2020

Circuits, Networks, and Neuropsychiatric Disease: Transitioning From Anatomy to Imaging.

Suzanne N Haber, Wei Tang, Eun Young Choi, Anastasia Yendiki, Hesheng Liu, Saad Jbabdi, Amelia Versace, Mary Phillips

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Biological psychiatry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing 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

35 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cognitive Control.Annual review of psychology · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Translation of monosynaptic circuits underlying amygdala fMRI neurofeedback training.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Closing the loop in psychiatric deep brain stimulation: physiology, psychometrics, and plasticity.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Patient-specific connectomic models correlate with, but do not reliably predict, outcomes in deep brain stimulation for obsessive-compulsive disorder.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2022
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Suzanne N HaberDepartment of Pharmacology and Physiology, University of Rochester School of Medicine, Rochester, New York; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts. Electronic address: Suzanne_Haber@urmc.rochester.edu.
Wei TangDepartment of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts.
Eun Young ChoiDepartment of Neuroscience, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Anastasia YendikiAthinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Harvard University & Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Hesheng LiuDepartment of Radiology, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina.
Saad JbabdiWellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Amelia VersaceDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Mary PhillipsDepartment of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/L009013/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the development of cellular and myelin stains, anatomy has formed the foundation for understanding circuitry in the human brain. However, recent functional and structural studies using magnetic resonance imaging have taken the lead in this endeavor. These innovative and noninvasive approaches have the advantage of studying connectivity patterns under different conditions directly in the human brain. They demonstrate dynamic and structural changes within and across networks linked to normal function and to a wide range of psychiatric illnesses. However, these indirect methods are unable to link networks to the hardwiring that underlies them. In contrast, anatomic invasive experimental studies can. Following a brief review of prefrontal cortical, anterior cingulate, and striatal connections and the different methodologies used, this article discusses how data from anatomic studies can help inform how hardwired connections are linked to the functional and structural networks identified in imaging studies.

Indexed as

Brain MappingMagnetic Resonance ImagingBrainGyrus CinguliHumansNeural PathwaysPrefrontal CortexAnterior cingulate cortexConnectivityDiffusion magnetic resonance imagingHubsPrefrontal cortexResting-state magnetic resonance imagingStriatumTract-tracing experiments

Identifiers

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.