ReviewNeuroradiology2024
Functional connectivity of the pediatric brain.
Review in Neuroradiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Functional brain growth trajectories across the first decade of life from a single longitudinal cohort.Research square · 2026Article
- Brain Functional Network Alterations in Adolescents With Major Depressive Disorder and Suicidal Attempt: A Resting-State fMRI Study.Alpha psychiatry · 2026Article
- The promise of infant MRI in psychiatry: toward a framework for neural network measures in early emotional and behavioral risk identification and new intervention targets.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Review
- Structural and functional connectivity of the brain in premature infants with non-hemorrhagic punctate white matter lesions: a graph analysis.Pediatric radiology · 2026Article
- The impact of glioblastoma on the contralesional hemisphere: insights from structural connectivity and cortical surface analysis.Neuroradiology · 2025Article
- Network Localization of Pediatric Lesion-Induced Dystonia.Annals of neurology · 2025Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis review highlights the importance of functional connectivity in pediatric neuroscience, focusing on its role in understanding neurodevelopment and potential applications in clinical practice. It discusses various techniques for analyzing brain connectivity and their implications for clinical interventions in neurodevelopmental disorders.
methodsThe principles and applications of independent component analysis and seed-based connectivity analysis in pediatric brain studies are outlined. Additionally, the use of graph analysis to enhance understanding of network organization and topology is reviewed, providing a comprehensive overview of connectivity methods across developmental stages, from fetuses to adolescents.
resultsFindings from the reviewed studies reveal that functional connectivity research has uncovered significant insights into the early formation of brain circuits in fetuses and neonates, particularly the prenatal origins of cognitive and sensory systems. Longitudinal research across childhood and adolescence demonstrates dynamic changes in brain connectivity, identifying critical periods of development and maturation that are essential for understanding neurodevelopmental trajectories and disorders.
conclusionFunctional connectivity methods are crucial for advancing pediatric neuroscience. Techniques such as independent component analysis, seed-based connectivity analysis, and graph analysis offer valuable perspectives on brain development, creating new opportunities for early diagnosis and targeted interventions in neurodevelopmental disorders, thereby paving the way for personalized therapeutic strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39230715What 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.