ReviewNature reviews. Neuroscience2025
Sleuthing subjectivity: a review of covert measures of consciousness.
Review in Nature reviews. Neuroscience, 2025. 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.
- In-scanner thoughts contribute to resting-state functional connectivity.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Integrating olfactory assessments in consciousness disorders: methodologies and therapeutic potential.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Review
- Eye metrics often reflect visual conscious awareness, conscious content, and neural processing in cerebral blindness.Communications biology · 2025Article
- The human brain mechanisms of afterimages: From networks to cortical layers.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 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
Consciousness is private. Although conscious beings directly access their own conscious experiences, the consciousness of others must be inferred through overt report: observable behaviours - such as overt facial expressions, vocalizations and body gestures - that suggest the level, state and content of consciousness. However, overt report is limited because it can be erroneous (for example, resulting from wilful deception or being subject to recall error), absent (for example, during sleep and paralysis) or conflict with research goals (for example, in no-report paradigms and resting-state studies). These limitations encourage the search for covert measures of consciousness: physiological signals that disclose consciousness without relying on overt behaviour. This Review highlights emerging covert measures of consciousness in humans, including eye, skin, respiratory and heart signals. We also address the challenge of distinguishing physiological signals linked to conscious versus unconscious neural processing. Finally, we consider the ethical implications of infringing on the innate privacy of consciousness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40410390What 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.