Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33254073›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in neurobiology2020

Rethinking brain-wide interactions through multi-region 'network of networks' models.

Matthew G Perich, Kanaka Rajan

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in neurobiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing 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

47 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Cerebral capillary computation.American journal of physiology. Cell physiology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. A neural manifold view of the brain.Nature neuroscience · 2025
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Structure of activity in multiregion recurrent neural networks.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    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

2 authors.

Matthew G PerichDepartment of Neuroscience, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: mperich@gmail.com.
Kanaka RajanDepartment of Neuroscience, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: kanaka.rajan@mssm.edu.

Funding

Multi-region 'Network of Networks' Recurrent Neural Network Models of Adaptive and Maladaptive LearningR01EB028166 · NIBIB · ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI · PI RAJAN, KANAKA · 2019 to 2019
$1.2M
NIBIB NIH HHS R01 EB028166
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The neural control of behavior is distributed across many functionally and anatomically distinct brain regions even in small nervous systems. While classical neuroscience models treated these regions as a set of hierarchically isolated nodes, the brain comprises a recurrently interconnected network in which each region is intimately modulated by many others. Uncovering these interactions is now possible through experimental techniques that access large neural populations from many brain regions simultaneously. Harnessing these large-scale datasets, however, requires new theoretical approaches. Here, we review recent work to understand brain-wide interactions using multi-region 'network of networks' models and discuss how they can guide future experiments. We also emphasize the importance of multi-region recordings, and posit that studying individual components in isolation will be insufficient to understand the neural basis of behavior.

Indexed as

BrainModels, NeurologicalBrain Mapping

Identifiers

PMID33254073
PMCPMC7822595

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.