Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35781077›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2022

Metastability, fractal scaling, and synergistic information processing: What phase relationships reveal about intrinsic brain activity.

Fran Hancock, Joana Cabral, Andrea I Luppi, Fernando E Rosas, Pedro A M Mediano, Ottavia Dipasquale, Federico E Turkheimer

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07221864 (Decoding Emotional Dynamics Driving Mood Instability in Bipolar Disorder), which is not on this map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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.

NCT07221864 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Decoding Emotional Dynamics Driving Mood Instability in Bipolar Disorder

TypeinterventionalSponsorLaureate Institute for Brain Research, Inc.Ran2025 to 2028Enrolled72ConditionsBipolar Disorder I or II, Healthy (Controls)ArmsThink and Regulate Affective State Task
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

7 authors.

Fran HancockDepartment of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom. Electronic address: fran.hancock@kcl.ac.uk.
Joana CabralLife and Health Sciences Research Institute (ICVS), School of Medicine, University of Minho, Portugal.
Andrea I LuppiDivision of Anaesthesia, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge; Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Cambridge; Leverhulme Centre for the Future of Intelligence, University of Cambridge; Alan Turing Institute, London, United Kingdom.
Fernando E RosasCentre for Psychedelic Research, Department of Brain Science, Imperial College London, London SW7 2DD, United Kingdom; Data Science Institute, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom; Centre for Complexity Science, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom.
Pedro A M MedianoDepartment of Psychology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 3EB, United Kingdom; Department of Psychology, Queen Mary University of London, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom.
Ottavia DipasqualeDepartment of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Federico E TurkheimerDepartment of Neuroimaging, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 210920/Z/18/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dynamic functional connectivity (dFC) in resting-state fMRI holds promise to deliver candidate biomarkers for clinical applications. However, the reliability and interpretability of dFC metrics remain contested. Despite a myriad of methodologies and resulting measures, few studies have combined metrics derived from different conceptualizations of brain functioning within the same analysis - perhaps missing an opportunity for improved interpretability. Using a complexity-science approach, we assessed the reliability and interrelationships of a battery of phase-based dFC metrics including tools originating from dynamical systems, stochastic processes, and information dynamics approaches. Our analysis revealed novel relationships between these metrics, which allowed us to build a predictive model for integrated information using metrics from dynamical systems and information theory. Furthermore, global metastability - a metric reflecting simultaneous tendencies for coupling and decoupling - was found to be the most representative and stable metric in brain parcellations that included cerebellar regions. Additionally, spatiotemporal patterns of phase-locking were found to change in a slow, non-random, continuous manner over time. Taken together, our findings show that the majority of characteristics of resting-state fMRI dynamics reflect an interrelated dynamical and informational complexity profile, which is unique to each acquisition. This finding challenges the interpretation of results from cross-sectional designs for brain neuromarker discovery, suggesting that individual life-trajectories may be more informative than sample means.

Indexed as

BrainFractalsBrain MappingCross-Sectional StudiesHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReproducibility of ResultsComplexityDynamic functional connectivityFractal scalingFunctional magnetic resonance imagingIntegrated informationLEiDAMetastability

Identifiers

PMID35781077
PMCPMC9339663

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.