ArticleFrontiers in systems neuroscience2022
Statistical Perspective on Functional and Causal Neural Connectomics: A Comparative Study.
Article in Frontiers in systems neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- State-Dependent Organization of Microscale Functional Circuitry in Visual Cortex.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Nonparametric Causal Inference for Optogenetics: Sequential Excursion Effects for Dynamic Regimes.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2026Article
- Identification of interacting neural populations: methods and statistical considerations.Journal of neurophysiology · 2023Review
- Causal functional connectivity in Alzheimer's disease computed from time series fMRI data.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2023Article
- Statistical perspective on functional and causal neural connectomics: The Time-Aware PC algorithm.PLoS computational biology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Representation of brain network interactions is fundamental to the translation of neural structure to brain function. As such, methodologies for mapping neural interactions into structural models, i.e., inference of functional connectome from neural recordings, are key for the study of brain networks. While multiple approaches have been proposed for functional connectomics based on statistical associations between neural activity, association does not necessarily incorporate causation. Additional approaches have been proposed to incorporate aspects of causality to turn functional connectomes into causal functional connectomes, however, these methodologies typically focus on specific aspects of causality. This warrants a systematic statistical framework for causal functional connectomics that defines the foundations of common aspects of causality. Such a framework can assist in contrasting existing approaches and to guide development of further causal methodologies. In this work, we develop such a statistical guide. In particular, we consolidate the notions of associations and representations of neural interaction, i.e., types of neural connectomics, and then describe causal modeling in the statistics literature. We particularly focus on the introduction of directed Markov graphical models as a framework through which we define the Directed Markov Property-an essential criterion for examining the causality of proposed functional connectomes. We demonstrate how based on these notions, a comparative study of several existing approaches for finding causal functional connectivity from neural activity can be conducted. We proceed by providing an outlook ahead regarding the additional properties that future approaches could include to thoroughly address causality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.