ArticleScientific reports2026
Nasal and oral breathing modes reconfigure brain network dynamics between stabilizing integration and promoting fragmentation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Breathing rhythmically coordinates neural oscillations across the brain, yet how the breathing mode (nasal vs. oral) modulates large-scale functional networks over time remains unclear. Building on prior static connectivity findings, this study applied dynamic functional connectivity (dFC) analysis using a hidden Markov model (HMM) to resting-state fMRI data from 20 healthy adults during nasal and oral breathing, focusing on the 0.1-0.2 Hz frequency band. Three recurrent brain states were identified: (1) a weakly connected, segregated state; (2) a globally integrated state dominated by default mode, frontoparietal, salience, and limbic networks; and (3) a partially segregated intermediate state. Compared with oral breathing, nasal breathing stabilized the integrated state, increasing its lifetime (p-FDR = 0.03) and reducing switching rates (p-FDR = 0.002). Oral breathing showed greater fractional occupancy of the intermediate state (p-FDR = 0.03) and a higher probability of transitions from integration to fragmentation (p-FDR = 0.02). Graph-theoretic analysis also revealed that nasal breathing supported a configuration with higher efficiency and lower modularity. Taken together, this study provides the first respiration-entrained, HMM-based dFC analysis of resting-state fMRI, demonstrating that nasal breathing entrains a stable, globally coherent state, whereas oral breathing disrupts this stability and promotes fragmented network organization.
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.