Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33347455›Full record

ArticlePLoS computational biology2020

Differential effects of propofol and ketamine on critical brain dynamics.

Thomas F Varley, Olaf Sporns, Aina Puce, John Beggs

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS computational biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. The Administration of Ketamine Is Associated with Dose-Dependent Stabilization of Cortical Dynamics in Humans.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  8. Towards an expanded neurocognitive account of ketamine's rapid antidepressant effects.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Partial entropy decomposition reveals higher-order information structures in human brain activity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  16. 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

4 authors.

Thomas F VarleyPsychological & Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3317-9882
Olaf SpornsPsychological & Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7265-4036
Aina PucePsychological & Brain Sciences, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0716-4185
John BeggsDepartment of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2368-1366

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whether the brain operates at a critical "tipping" point is a long standing scientific question, with evidence from both cellular and systems-scale studies suggesting that the brain does sit in, or near, a critical regime. Neuroimaging studies of humans in altered states of consciousness have prompted the suggestion that maintenance of critical dynamics is necessary for the emergence of consciousness and complex cognition, and that reduced or disorganized consciousness may be associated with deviations from criticality. Unfortunately, many of the cellular-level studies reporting signs of criticality were performed in non-conscious systems (in vitro neuronal cultures) or unconscious animals (e.g. anaesthetized rats). Here we attempted to address this knowledge gap by exploring critical brain dynamics in invasive ECoG recordings from multiple sessions with a single macaque as the animal transitioned from consciousness to unconsciousness under different anaesthetics (ketamine and propofol). We use a previously-validated test of criticality: avalanche dynamics to assess the differences in brain dynamics between normal consciousness and both drug-states. Propofol and ketamine were selected due to their differential effects on consciousness (ketamine, but not propofol, is known to induce an unusual state known as "dissociative anaesthesia"). Our analyses indicate that propofol dramatically restricted the size and duration of avalanches, while ketamine allowed for more awake-like dynamics to persist. In addition, propofol, but not ketamine, triggered a large reduction in the complexity of brain dynamics. All states, however, showed some signs of persistent criticality when testing for exponent relations and universal shape-collapse. Further, maintenance of critical brain dynamics may be important for regulation and control of conscious awareness.

Indexed as

Anesthetics, DissociativeAnimalsBrainConsciousnessElectroencephalographyHaplorhiniHypnotics and SedativesKetaminePropofolWakefulnessAnesthetics, DissociativeHypnotics and SedativesKetaminePropofol

Identifiers

PMID33347455
PMCPMC7785236

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.