ArticleHuman brain mapping2025
Evidence for Transient, Uncoupled Power and Functional Connectivity Dynamics.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Global temperature anomaly prediction by using additive twin LSTM networks.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Dynamic, state-dependent characteristics of cognitive fluctuations in Lewy body dementia: a magnetoencephalography study.Brain communications · 2026Article
- Modelling discrete states and long-term dynamics in functional brain networks.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.
Funding
Abstract
There is growing interest in studying the temporal structure in brain network activity, in particular, dynamic functional connectivity (FC), which has been linked in several studies with cognition, demographics and disease states. The sliding window approach is one of the most common approaches to compute dynamic FC. However, it cannot detect cognitively relevant and transient temporal changes at time scales of fast cognition, that is, on the order of 100 ms, which can be identified with model-based methods such as the HMM (Hidden Markov Model) and DyNeMo (Dynamic Network Modes) using electrophysiology. These new methods provide time-varying estimates of the 'power' (i.e., variance) and of the functional connectivity of the brain activity, under the assumption that they share the same dynamics. But there is no principled basis for this assumption. Using a new method that allows for the possibility that power and FC networks have different dynamics (Multi-dynamic DyNeMo) on resting-state magnetoencephalography (MEG) data, we show that the dynamics of the power and the FC networks are not coupled. Using a (visual) task MEG dataset, we show that the power and FC network dynamics are modulated by the task, such that the coupling in their dynamics changes significantly during the task. This work reveals novel insights into evoked network responses and ongoing activity that previous methods fail to capture, challenging the assumption that power and FC share the same dynamics.
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.