ArticleFrontiers in neurorobotics2024
Metastability indexes global changes in the dynamic working point of the brain following brain stimulation.
Article in Frontiers in neurorobotics, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dynamic functional connectivity in borderline personality disorder: associations with trauma, emotion regulation and symptom severity.European archives of psychiatry and clinical neuroscience · 2026Article
- Phase-dependent stimulation response is shaped by the brain's dynamic functional connectivity.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- EEG dynamical features during variable-intensity cycling exercise in Parkinson's disease.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Article
- Emergence of metastability in frustrated oscillatory networks: the key role of hierarchical modularity.Frontiers in network physiology · 2024Article
- From early to contemporary normative modeling: Mapping individual differences in neurophysiological signals.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several studies have shown that coordination among neural ensembles is a key to understand human cognition. A well charted path is to identify coordination states associated with cognitive functions from spectral changes in the oscillations of EEG or MEG. A growing number of studies suggest that the tendency to switch between coordination states, sculpts the dynamic repertoire of the brain and can be indexed by a measure known as metastability. In this article, we characterize perturbations in the metastability of global brain network dynamics following Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation that could quantify the duration for which information processing is altered. Thus allowing researchers to understand the network effects of brain stimulation, standardize stimulation protocols and design experimental tasks. We demonstrate the effect empirically using publicly available datasets and use a digital twin (a whole brain connectome model) to understand the dynamic principles that generate such observations. We observed a significant reduction in metastability, concurrent with an increase in coherence following single-pulse TMS reflecting the existence of a window where neural coordination is altered. The reduction in complexity was validated by an additional measure based on the Lempel-Ziv complexity of microstate labeled EEG data. Interestingly, higher frequencies in the EEG signal showed faster recovery in metastability than lower frequencies. The digital twin shed light on how the phase resetting introduced by the single-pulse TMS in local cortical networks can propagate globally, giving rise to changes in metastability and coherence.
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.