ArticleNetwork neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2023
Comparing individual and group-level simulated neurophysiological brain connectivity using the Jansen and Rit neural mass model.
Article in Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2023. 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.
- Frequency-Resolved Cortical Functional Connectivity Across the Adult Lifespan.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Frequency-resolved cortical functional connectivity across the adult lifespan.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Homeodynamic feedback inhibition control in whole-brain simulations.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- Validation and adaptation of the moral outrage scale in the Peruvian adult population.BMC psychology · 2024Article
- Bayesian inference of frequency-specific functional connectivity in MEG imaging using a spectral graph model.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Computational models are often used to assess how functional connectivity (FC) patterns emerge from neuronal population dynamics and anatomical brain connections. It remains unclear whether the commonly used group-averaged data can predict individual FC patterns. The Jansen and Rit neural mass model was employed, where masses were coupled using individual structural connectivity (SC). Simulated FC was correlated to individual magnetoencephalography-derived empirical FC. FC was estimated using phase-based (phase lag index (PLI), phase locking value (PLV)), and amplitude-based (amplitude envelope correlation (AEC)) metrics to analyze their goodness of fit for individual predictions. Individual FC predictions were compared against group-averaged FC predictions, and we tested whether SC of a different participant could equally well predict participants' FC patterns. The AEC provided a better match between individually simulated and empirical FC than phase-based metrics. Correlations between simulated and empirical FC were higher using individual SC compared to group-averaged SC. Using SC from other participants resulted in similar correlations between simulated and empirical FC compared to using participants' own SC. This work underlines the added value of FC simulations using individual instead of group-averaged SC for this particular computational model and could aid in a better understanding of mechanisms underlying individual functional network trajectories.
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.