ArticleScientific reports2024
The impact of input node placement in the controllability of structural brain networks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- The network architecture of general intelligence in the human connectome.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Multitarget neurostimulation of the deep brain: clinical opportunities, challenges, and emerging technologies.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Review
- Topological Biomarkers of Alzheimer's Disease from Functional Brain Network Analysis.Current Alzheimer research · 2025Article
- Functional Connectome Controllability in Patients with Mild Cognitive Impairment after Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of the Dorsolateral Prefrontal Cortex.Journal of clinical medicine · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Network controllability refers to the ability to steer the state of a network towards a target state by driving certain nodes, known as input nodes. This concept can be applied to brain networks for studying brain function and its relation to the structure, which has numerous practical applications. Brain network controllability involves using external signals such as electrical stimulation to drive specific brain regions and navigate the neurophysiological activity level of the brain around the state space. Although controllability is mainly theoretical, the energy required for control is critical in real-world implementations. With a focus on the structural brain networks, this study explores the impact of white matter fiber architecture on the control energy in brain networks using the theory of how input node placement affects the LCC (the longest distance between inputs and other network nodes). Initially, we use a single input node as it is theoretically possible to control brain networks with just one input. We show that highly connected brain regions that lead to lower LCCs are more energy-efficient as a single input node. However, there may still be a need for a significant amount of control energy with one input, and achieving controllability with less energy could be of interest. We identify the minimum number of input nodes required to control brain networks with smaller LCCs, demonstrating that reducing the LCC can significantly decrease the control energy in brain networks. Our results show that relying solely on highly connected nodes is not effective in controlling brain networks with lower energy by using multiple inputs because of densely interconnected brain network hubs. Instead, a combination of low and high-degree nodes is necessary.
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.