Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41567828›Full record

ArticleBrain communications2026

The structural reserve of brain networks influences outcomes after a stroke.

Lukas Frontzkowski, Tim J Hunze, Winifried Backhaus, Marlene Bönstrup, Christian Gerloff, Bastian Cheng, Götz Thomalla, Benedikt M Frey, Paweł P Wróbel, Hanna Braaß and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Slow Oscillations Track Acute Stroke Injury but Not Functional Recovery.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
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

14 authors.

Lukas FrontzkowskiDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.
Tim J HunzeDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.
Winifried BackhausDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.
Marlene BönstrupDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7237-1359
Christian GerloffDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.
Bastian ChengDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2434-1822
Götz ThomallaDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4785-1449
Benedikt M FreyDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.
Paweł P WróbelDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6047-3623
Hanna BraaßDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1400-8404
Philipp J KochDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Lübeck, Lübeck 23562, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8795-758X
Focko L HiggenDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.
Fanny QuandtDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7042-6785
Robert SchulzDepartment of Neurology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg 20251, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Structural brain reserve capacity has recently gained an increasing interest in stroke recovery research. Focal and global measures of brain reserve have been linked with recovery trajectories. Whether the reserve localized within large-scale brain networks might also carry information to better understand outcome variability after stroke is an open question. This work analysed 31 patients with severe, first-ever unilateral, supratentorial stroke. Patients underwent MRI brain imaging and clinical testing within the first 2 weeks after the event and a longitudinal clinical follow-up after 3-6 months. Individual tractography in the contralesional hemisphere was performed to reconstruct structural connectomes to approximate the state of the ipsilesional brain networks before the stroke. Graph theory was applied to describe network integration and segregation topologies. Linear and ordinal logistic regression analyses were conducted to associate network topologies at baseline with neurological symptom burden, global and activity-related disability and motor impairment at follow-up. The main finding was that less segregated and more integrated networks, characterized by lower network modularity and higher efficiency, were linked with a more favourable outcome on follow-up. Modularity exerted a remarkably consistent influence across various outcome measures. This association was independent of the initial deficit, lesion volume or age. This study sheds novel light on brain reserve, localizing within the topology of pre-stroke structural brain networks, as a critical determinant of recovery after stroke.

Indexed as

connectomegraph theoryrecoveryrehabilitationstroke

Identifiers

PMID41567828
PMCPMC12816807

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.