Cited by 484Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Co-activation patterns distinguish cortical modules, their connectivity and functional differentiation

Open access
Eickhoff, Simon B., Bzdok, Danilo, Laird, Angela R., Roski, Christian, Caspers, Svenja, Zilles, Karl, Fox, Peter T.·2011·NeuroImage

Abstract

The organization of the cerebral cortex into distinct modules may be described along several dimensions, most importantly, structure, connectivity and function. Identification of cortical modules by differences in whole-brain connectivity profiles derived from diffusion tensor imaging or resting state correlations has already been shown. These approaches, however, carry no task-related information. Hence, inference on the functional relevance of the ensuing parcellation remains tentative. Here, we demonstrate, that Meta-Analytic Connectivity Modeling (MACM) allows the delineation of cortical modules based on their whole-brain co-activation pattern across databased neuroimaging results. Using a model free approach, two regions of the medial pre-motor cortex, SMA and pre-SMA were differentiated solely based on their functional connectivity. Assessing the behavioral domain and paradigm class meta-data of the experiments associated with the clusters derived from the co-activation based parcellation moreover allows the identification of their functional characteristics. The ensuing hypotheses about functional differentiation and distinct functional connectivity between pre-SMA and SMA were then explicitly tested and confirmed in independent datasets using functional and resting state fMRI. Co-activation based parcellation thus provides a new perspective for identifying modules of functional connectivity and linking them to functional properties, hereby generating new and subsequently testable hypotheses about the organization of cortical modules.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.05.021

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The brain exhibits distinct patterns of activity organization, with segregated yet integrated modules that dynamically interact during rest and task-based activity.

    “advancements in the study of structural and functional connectomics have provided substantial evidence of distinct patterns of brain activity organization, with segregated, yet integrated modules that dynamically interact during rest and task-based activity (van den Heuvel et al. 2009; Eickhoff et al. 2011; Laird et al. 2013; Raichle 2015; Margulies et al. 2016; Basile et al. 2022a)”

    From Neuroanatomical correlates of peripersonal space: bridging the gap between perception, action, emotion and social cognition (2024) · cites this paper as Eickhoff et al. 2011

    The Discussion reports distinct cortical modules with different task-based co-activation patterns, and its comparison with resting-state connectivity describes correspondence between functional architecture during rest and activation (page not provided). It does not establish that segregated yet integrated modules dynamically interact during both rest and tasks. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The localization of the (pre)SMA volume of interest corresponds to both the anterior and posterior cluster of the SMA identified by functional characterization, which were associated with cognitive and executive aspects of motor behavior.

    “The localization of our (pre)SMA VOI corresponds to the localization of both the anterior and posterior cluster of the SMA identified by functional characterization (Eickhoff et al., 2011), which were associated to cognitive and executive aspects of motor behavior, respectively.”
  • The procedure for contrasting ALE maps effectively balances inference on reliable areas of activation without generating a bias toward false positives.

    “This procedure should effectively balance inference on reliable areas of activation without generating a bias toward false positives (Laird et al., 2005;Eickhoff et al., 2011).”
  • Functional characterization used a binomial test, Bonferroni-corrected for multiple comparisons, to identify functional roles of the convergent network.

    “Using a binomial test, Bonferroni-corrected for multiple comparisons, the functional roles of the convergent network as a whole were identified”
  • The resulting non-parametric p values for difference analyses were thresholded at p < 0.001.

    “These resulting non-parametric p values were thresholded at p < 0.001.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Vogt C Vogt O 1919 Allgemeinere Ergebnisse unserer Hirnforschung Journal für Psychologie und Neurologie 25 279 461

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Eickhoff, S. B., Bzdok, D., Laird, A. R., Roski, C., Caspers, S., Zilles, K., & Fox, P. T.
Affiliations
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
  • The University of Texas at San Antonio Health Science Center (US)
Corresponding author
Eickhoff, Simon B.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-08
Volume
57
Issue
3
Pages
938-949
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2001483470
Cited by
484
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 40 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 27 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 41 · 2016: 43 · 2015: 48 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 23
FWCI
14.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • JuSER (Forschungszentrum Jülich) (submittedVersion)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Human Brain Project (R01-MH074457-01A1)
  • Helmholtz Alliance on Systems Biology
  • DFG (IRTG 1328)
  • Helmholtz Alliance for Mental Health in an Aging Society
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
cortical modules, co-activation patterns, meta-analytic connectivity modeling, whole-brain functional connectivity, pre-supplementary motor area, supplementary motor area, functional parcellation
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Brain, Brain Mapping, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neural Pathways, Cluster Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review