Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38496724›Full record

ReviewNeuroscience of consciousness2021

Consciousness and complexity: a consilience of evidence.

Simone Sarasso, Adenauer Girardi Casali, Silvia Casarotto, Mario Rosanova, Corrado Sinigaglia, Marcello Massimini

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Neuroscience of consciousness, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 87 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
87citing 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.

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

87 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Neural complexity is increased after low doses of LSD, but not moderate to high doses of oral THC or methamphetamine.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Clinical utility and prospective of TMS-EEG: Updated review from an international expert group.Clinical neurophysiology : official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology · 2026
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

27 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Simone SarassoDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences 'L. Sacco', University of Milan, Milan 20157, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9984-4710
Adenauer Girardi CasaliInstituto de Ciência e Tecnologia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Sao Jose dos Campos, 12247-014, Brazil.
Silvia CasarottoDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences 'L. Sacco', University of Milan, Milan 20157, Italy.
Mario RosanovaDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences 'L. Sacco', University of Milan, Milan 20157, Italy.
Corrado SinigagliaDepartment of Philosophy, University of Milan, Milan 20122, Italy.
Marcello MassiminiDepartment of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences 'L. Sacco', University of Milan, Milan 20157, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the last years, a surge of empirical studies converged on complexity-related measures as reliable markers of consciousness across many different conditions, such as sleep, anesthesia, hallucinatory states, coma, and related disorders. Most of these measures were independently proposed by researchers endorsing disparate frameworks and employing different methods and techniques. Since this body of evidence has not been systematically reviewed and coherently organized so far, this positive trend has remained somewhat below the radar. The aim of this paper is to make this consilience of evidence in the science of consciousness explicit. We start with a systematic assessment of the growing literature on complexity-related measures and identify their common denominator, tracing it back to core theoretical principles and predictions put forward more than 20 years ago. In doing this, we highlight a consistent trajectory spanning two decades of consciousness research and provide a provisional taxonomy of the present literature. Finally, we consider all of the above as a positive ground to approach new questions and devise future experiments that may help consolidate and further develop a promising field where empirical research on consciousness appears to have, so far, naturally converged.

Indexed as

anesthesiacomainformationintegrationsleep

Identifiers

PMID38496724
PMCPMC10941977

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.