The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index, and 10 are not checked yet; none of the 62 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Dynamic reconfiguration of frontal brain networks during executive cognition in humans
Open accessAbstract
Significance: Cognitive flexibility is hypothesized to require dynamic integration between brain areas. However, the time-dependent nature and distributed complexity of this integration remains poorly understood. Using recent advances in network science, we examine the functional integration between brain areas during a quintessential task that requires executive function. By linking brain regions (nodes) by their interactions (time-dependent edges), we uncover nontrivial modular structure: groups of brain regions cluster together into densely interconnected structures whose interactions change during task execution. Individuals with greater network reconfiguration in frontal cortices show enhanced memory performance, and score higher on neuropsychological tests challenging cognitive flexibility, suggesting that dynamic network reconfiguration forms a fundamental neurophysiological mechanism for executive function.
Checked 2026-10-06 · 10 references not checked yet
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Using dynamic network neuroscience on fMRI data from 344 healthy adults performing an n-back working-memory task, the study shows that executive cognition involves transient reconfiguration of frontal brain networks rather than uniform whole-brain flexibility. Greater frontal flexibility and integration were linked to better working-memory accuracy and executive-flexibility measures.
Key findings
- Whole-brain network flexibility oscillated across task execution and differed by condition [repeated-measures ANOVA: F(2,343) = 20.75, P < 0.001], but whole-brain flexibility did not differ between 2-back and 0-back [t(343) = 1.31, P = 0.19].
- Reconfiguration was concentrated in frontal systems: frontal vs. nonfrontal consensus partitions were less similar [t(343) = −10.32, P < 0.001], and frontal-related modules showed higher flexibility than nonfrontal modules in 2-back [F(8,343) = 29.95, P < 0.001; post hoc t(343) = 9.42, P < 0.001] and 0-back [F(7,343) = 11.75, P < 0.001; post hoc t(343) = 4.98, P < 0.001].
- During 2-back, frontal flexibility correlated with task accuracy (Spearman r = 0.12, PFDR-corrected = 0.04, PBonferroni = 0.2), and frontal integration correlated with task accuracy (r = 0.14, PFDR-corrected = 0.024, PBonferroni = 0.096), backward digit span (r = 0.14, PFDR-corrected = 0.024, PBonferroni = 0.072), and TMT-B performance (r = −0.18, PFDR-corrected = 0.016, PBonferroni = 0.016), but not forward digit span (r = 0.004, PFDR-corrected = 0.95, PBonferroni = 1.0).
Methods
- 344 healthy volunteers (180 women; mean age 33; range 18–51 y) from a multicenter study underwent BOLD fMRI while performing a visual n-back task with alternating 0-back and 2-back blocks.
- Functional connectivity was estimated using a sliding time window of 15 volumes with no gap and Morlet wavelet coherence in the 0.08–0.15 Hz band, yielding 114 weighted adjacency matrices per subject.
- Multilayer community detection with 100 repetitions per subject identified time-respecting modules; flexibility measured how often a region changed module allegiance between consecutive windows, and integration measured transient module–module interactions. Behavioral associations used Spearman correlations with FDR and Bonferroni correction.
Limitations
- The paper states that dynamic community detection is heuristic and node-to-community assignments remain uncertain; fMRI temporal resolution limits dynamic resolution; functional connectivity is not causal; hard partitioning is used; the n-back task cannot distinguish working-memory maintenance from manipulation; and behavioral correlations are small, with some failing Bonferroni correction.
- The study sample is healthy adults, so the findings may not generalize to clinical populations such as schizophrenia or dementia, which the paper mentions as relevant future contexts.
- The reported behavioral effects are exploratory in part, and the paper cautions that they should be validated in future studies.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 62 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Several modules were consistently identified in both the 0-back and 2-back conditions: somatomotor, visual, subcortical, and hippocampal modules.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observed that the time-dependent network flexibility oscillates across task execution, reaching clear maxima in time windows dominated by either the 2-back or 0-back (baseline) conditions [Fig. 1F; repeated-measures ANOVA with condition as factor: F(2,343) = 20.75, P < 0.001].”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During the 2-back working-memory condition, frontal flexibility was positively correlated with task accuracy (Fig. 3A; Spearman's rank correlation coefficient r = 0.12, PFDR-corrected = 0.04, PBonferroni = 0.2),”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This pattern was conserved during the 0-back condition [F(7,343) = 11.75, P < 0.001; post hoc paired t test between fronto-related and nonfrontal modules: t(343) = 4.98, P < 0.001].”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A paired t test on the z score for frontal vs. nonfrontal regions showed a significantly higher similarity for nonfrontal regions [t(343) = −10.32, P < 0.001], supporting the visually marked differences between frontal and nonfrontal modules.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, flexibility was more evenly distributed in the 0-back condition between systems as evidenced by a significant main effect of task and significant interaction in a two-way repeated-measures ANOVA with task and frontal vs. nonfrontal as categorical factors [main effect of task: F(1,343) = 6.25, P < 0.013; effect of interaction: F(1,343) = 16.5, P < 0.001].”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This reconfiguration, which characterizes “network flexibility,” employs transient and heterogeneous connectivity between frontal systems, which we refer to as “integration.””
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consistent with our earlier results, we observed higher integration in frontal systems than nonfrontal systems in the 2-back condition,”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, in the 2-back condition a module consisting of nodes in the right prefrontal cortex dissociated from the bilateral frontotemporal module detected during the 0-back condition.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Frontal integration predicted neuropsychological measures requiring working memory and executive cognition, suggesting that dynamic network reconfiguration between frontal systems supports those functions.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passes
- It may state two separate claims as one. 27
- Probably not a substantial claim. 28
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, the frontoparietal module was composed of more medial structures in the 0-back condition, and more lateral structures in the 2-back condition;”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast to a control condition, in which dynamic changes in cortical networks were spread evenly across systems, the effortful working-memory condition was characterized by a reconfiguration of frontoparietal and frontotemporal networks.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the current study, we demonstrate that brain network flexibility and its relationship to cognitive demand can be tracked continuously on the order of minutes and undergoes specific and repetitive changes even within a given task.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“we observe that the module that we have referred to as the “parietal module” contains a large portion of higher-order association areas that were classified as part of the visual system in Power et al. (36) (i.e., 85% of nodes in our parietal module were assigned to Power et al.’s “visual module”)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Power JD, et al. Functional network organization of the human brain. Neuron. 2011;72(4):665–678. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.09.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, we observed that the decomposition of the module allegiance matrices into network modules was replicable.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite the conservation of whole-brain flexibility across working-memory load, we did observe a redistribution of flexibility across cognitive systems.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We robustly observe that network flexibility oscillates across task performance”
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We provide evidence that the amount of reorganization in the modular structure and specifically the amount of interaction between modules is behaviorally relevant to working-memory performance and cognitive flexibility.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The identified network modules map well to biologically meaningful systems of intrinsic connectivity (36) and specifically systems commonly engaged during working-memory performance (14, 38, 39)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Power JD, et al. Functional network organization of the human brain. Neuron. 2011;72(4):665–678. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.09.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [14] Ginestet CE, Simmons A. Statistical parametric network analysis of functional connectivity dynamics during a working memory task. Neuroimage. 2011;55(2):688–704. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [38] Hampson M, Driesen NR, Skudlarski P, Gore JC, Constable RT. Brain connectivity related to working memory performance. J Neurosci. 2006;26(51):13338–13343. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3408-06.2006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the present study, we have provided evidence that the functional connectivity during a working-memory task is dynamically organized into adapting modules and that this adapting modular structure relates to cognitive demands.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“We found 46% of the mapped nodes belonging to the frontoparietal module identified by us, whereas 27% belonged to the somatomotor module and 12% belonged to the frontal module.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] Owen AM, McMillan KM, Laird AR, Bullmore E. N-back working memory paradigm: A meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies. Hum Brain Mapp. 2005;25(1):46–59. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fourth, we observed a significant difference in flexibility between 0-back and 2-back [repeated-measures ANOVA with task and frontal vs. nonfrontal as categorical factors, main effect of task: F(1,343) = 21.8, P < 0.001], which was a trend in the results based on coherence.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Critically, we observe that network modules differ in their degree of integration with other network modules: stable core-like modules including visual and somatomotor systems show relatively weak integration with other modules, whereas frontal and frontal-mediated modules show relatively strong integration with other modules (Fig. 2D).”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, the behavioral correlations we observed are small and some fail to reach statistical significance under Bonferroni correction, and therefore should be interpreted with caution and validated in future studies.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Due to the heuristic nature of the algorithm and to the near degeneracy of the optimization landscape of the multilayer modularity quality function, each independent run of the algorithm provided slightly different partitions of network nodes into communities across the 114 time slices (or network layers).”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The clustering coefficient is highest between task blocks and lowest within task blocks, whereas the path length is longest between task blocks and shortest within task blocks.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The clustering coefficient is highest between task blocks and lowest within task blocks, whereas the path length is longest between task blocks and shortest within task blocks.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Theoretical frameworks for working memory call on the interplay of distinct components (12) and their integration in broader cognitive circuits (1).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Baddeley A. Working memory. C R Acad Sci III. 1998;321(2-3):167–173. doi: 10.1016/s0764-4469(97)89817-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [1] Shohamy D, Turk-Browne NB. Mechanisms for widespread hippocampal involvement in cognition. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2013;142(4):1159–1170. doi: 10.1037/a0034461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Working memory lies at the interface of perception and action (7) and requires the integration of large-scale neural circuits (8–11).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [8] Shrager Y, Levy DA, Hopkins RO, Squire LR. Working memory and the organization of brain systems. J Neurosci. 2008;28(18):4818–4822. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0710-08.2008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [9] Bressler SL, Menon V. Large-scale brain networks in cognition: Emerging methods and principles. Trends Cogn Sci. 2010;14(6):277–290. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2010.04.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [10] Dehaene S, Naccache L. Towards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: Basic evidence and a workspace framework. Cognition. 2001;79(1-2):1–37. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00123-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [11] Baars BJ, Franklin S. How conscious experience and working memory interact. Trends Cogn Sci. 2003;7(4):166–172. doi: 10.1016/s1364-6613(03)00056-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“emerging evidence indicates that many so-called “domain-general” areas engage in multiple functions, differing from “domain-specific” areas such as primary visual cortex that perform a very specific function (1, 2).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1] Shohamy D, Turk-Browne NB. Mechanisms for widespread hippocampal involvement in cognition. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2013;142(4):1159–1170. doi: 10.1037/a0034461. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [2] Fedorenko E, Thompson-Schill SL. Reworking the language network. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(3):120–126. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.12.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The empirical neuroimaging literature has bolstered these conceptualizations by identifying several distinct sets of brain areas underlying working-memory performance (13–17).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] Baddeley A. Working memory: Looking back and looking forward. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003;4(10):829–839. doi: 10.1038/nrn1201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [14] Ginestet CE, Simmons A. Statistical parametric network analysis of functional connectivity dynamics during a working memory task. Neuroimage. 2011;55(2):688–704. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.11.030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [15] Collette F, Van der Linden M. Brain imaging of the central executive component of working memory. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2002;26(2):105–125. doi: 10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00063-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [16] McNab F, Klingberg T. Prefrontal cortex and basal ganglia control access to working memory. Nat Neurosci. 2008;11(1):103–107. doi: 10.1038/nn2024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [17] Deserno L, Sterzer P, Wüstenberg T, Heinz A, Schlagenhauf F. Reduced prefrontal-parietal effective connectivity and working memory deficits in schizophrenia. J Neurosci. 2012;32(1):12–20. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3405-11.2012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:boosted· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Working memory lies at the interface of perception and action (7)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] Linden DE. The working memory networks of the human brain. Neuroscientist. 2007;13(3):257–267. doi: 10.1177/1073858406298480. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that dynamic network reorganization is taking place predominately in frontal systems and is driven by a constant readaptation and interaction of frontal systems with each other.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Based on the cognitive load of the 2-back condition (20–22)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Baddeley A. Exploring the central executive. Q J Exp Psychol A. 1996;49(1):5–28. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Miyake A, et al. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognit Psychol. 2000;41(1):49–100. doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [22] Kane MJ, Conway AR, Miura TK, Colflesh GJ. Working memory, attention control, and the N-back task: A question of construct validity. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2007;33(3):615–622. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.33.3.615. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This analysis confirms our previous results are not due to noise and finite data length, but show task-specific variations.”
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, identical solutions that are obtained from diverse initial conditions actually indicate important replicable features of the landscape, which should be accounted for in subsequent analysis.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, as of today, a common method for dealing with this degeneracy is to examine statistics averaged over the 100 repetitions of the optimization, with equal weight being placed on each solution, rather than just on the unique solutions.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] Bassett DS, et al. Robust detection of dynamic community structure in networks. Chaos. 2013;23(1):013142. doi: 10.1063/1.4790830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [51] Good BH, de Montjoye Y-A, Clauset A. Performance of modularity maximization in practical contexts. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys. 2010;81(4 Pt 2):046106. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.81.046106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As a complex system, the human brain is intrinsically organized into modules, creating a high degree of flexibility and adaptability of the system without fundamentally altering underlying structure (29, 30).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [29] Kirschner M, Gerhart J. Evolvability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1998;95(15):8420–8427. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.15.8420. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [30] Bassett DS, Gazzaniga MS. Understanding complexity in the human brain. Trends Cogn Sci. 2011;15(5):200–209. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2011.03.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This indicates that the dynamic reconfiguration of frontal systems for working-memory function may not be limited to the n-back working-memory paradigm but may be essential for the manipulation of stored information across tasks.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It is intuitively plausible that the strong integration of frontal systems with other network modules forms a physiological basis for cognitive flexibility (15, 41), enabling task switching and cognitive control during demanding tasks (21, 42).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Collette F, Van der Linden M. Brain imaging of the central executive component of working memory. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2002;26(2):105–125. doi: 10.1016/s0149-7634(01)00063-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [41] Stuss DT. Frontal lobes and attention: Processes and networks, fractionation and integration. J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2006;12(2):261–271. doi: 10.1017/S1355617706060358. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [21] Miyake A, et al. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognit Psychol. 2000;41(1):49–100. doi: 10.1006/cogp.1999.0734. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Mathematically, the wavelet-based measures provide significant denoising to the signal, enhancing signal-to-noise ratio in subsequent analyses.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“due to heuristics in the algorithm and challenges inherent to fMRI data, the assignment of nodes to communities on the individual subject level remains a statistical process, accompanied by some degree of uncertainty.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“maximizing the modularity quality function is NP-hard, and we therefore use a Louvain-like locally greedy heuristic algorithm (50) to seek the optimal modularity index Q.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [50] Jutla I, Jeub L, Mucha P. 2011. A generalized Louvain method for community detection implemented in MATLAB (computer program). Available at netwiki.amath.unc.edu. Accessed September 1, 2014.
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we remain limited by the temporal resolution of fMRI data, making it likely that the modular changes and behavioral associations we observed might be further resolved in time if electrophysiological data were used.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In a recent paper from Van De Ville and colleague (49), the authors demonstrate the optimality of a 30-s time window for quantifying dynamic reconfiguration of networks in the frequency range 0.08–0.15 Hz.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [49] Leonardi N, Van De Ville D. On spurious and real fluctuations of dynamic functional connectivity during rest. Neuroimage. 2015;104:430–436. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“flexibility can be driven by transient interactions between modules: the more transient module–module interactions, the more likely regions are to flexibly alter their allegiance to cognitive systems—an aspect of reconfiguration that we capture by integration.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The n-back task has been studied extensively in the context of traditional activation and connectivity analyses (38, 39), identifying a large (executive) working-memory network dominated by frontal and parietal regions.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [38] Hampson M, Driesen NR, Skudlarski P, Gore JC, Constable RT. Brain connectivity related to working memory performance. J Neurosci. 2006;26(51):13338–13343. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3408-06.2006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [39] Owen AM, McMillan KM, Laird AR, Bullmore E. N-back working memory paradigm: A meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies. Hum Brain Mapp. 2005;25(1):46–59. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20131. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, we use a measure of functional connectivity that does not reflect causal interaction.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Indeed, connectivity analyses, and more complex measures of the dynamic reconfiguration of networks in face of different task demands, are not competitive with activation studies but provide very complementary insights that directly address the underlying mechanisms of cognitive processes (61).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [61] Bassett DS, Yang M, Wymbs NF, Grafton ST. Learning-induced autonomy of sensorimotor systems. Nat Neurosci. 2015;18(5):744–751. doi: 10.1038/nn.3993. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results support the view that, within task blocks, network reconfiguration mainly takes place between modules, thus resulting in a lower clustering coefficient and an increased path length.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, the current work can be seen as a direct validation of the role of frontal regions in adaptive behavior, and as clarifying the mechanism of this role as based on dynamic changes in functional connectivity.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes? Checkable: unclear✓ Load-bearing: passes? Based: unclearIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Finally, dynamic community detection methods have further been used in the context of human motor skill learning (3) and lexical processing (59).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] Bassett DS, et al. Dynamic reconfiguration of human brain networks during learning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2011;108(18):7641–7646. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1018985108. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [59] Doron KW, Bassett DS, Gazzaniga MS. Dynamic network structure of interhemispheric coordination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(46):18661–18668. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1216402109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In a following methods paper (25), we stringently evaluated the methodological choices required to robustly detect dynamic community structure in simulated and empirical data.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] Bassett DS, et al. Robust detection of dynamic community structure in networks. Chaos. 2013;23(1):013142. doi: 10.1063/1.4790830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Load-bearingStrength:boosted· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, although network reconfiguration explains a small amount of variance, it has quantifiable advantages over traditional analyses and here offers complementary insights into the neurobiological basis of working memory.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Third, the main effect of task was removed from the data to not confound network measures with large-scale block (co)activations, as has been done previously (e.g., see ref. 23).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites ref. 23
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To account for noise, only matrix elements whose values were larger than expected in a random network null model were taken into account.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“This procedure can be repeated iteratively, so that repeated optimizations of the modularity quality function of the consensus matrix Tcons return a single optimal consensus partition S, which partitions brain regions into representative putative functional modules that we interpret as cognitive systems (25).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] Bassett DS, et al. Robust detection of dynamic community structure in networks. Chaos. 2013;23(1):013142. doi: 10.1063/1.4790830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To be conservative, we remove such “noise” from the original nodal association matrix T by setting any element Tij whose value is less than the maximum entry of the random association matrix to 0.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“For example, although classical GLM-based approaches are often interpreted as indicating functional associations between regions, connectivity analyses provide direct evidence of neurophysiological mechanisms defining the roles of brain networks in cognition (2).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] Fedorenko E, Thompson-Schill SL. Reworking the language network. Trends Cogn Sci. 2014;18(3):120–126. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2013.12.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“In that paper, we also developed a framework of null model testing for statistical inference in the context of neuroimaging data.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [25] Bassett DS, et al. Robust detection of dynamic community structure in networks. Chaos. 2013;23(1):013142. doi: 10.1063/1.4790830. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In the original paper (6), the methods were tested on two different kinds of social networks, and results were consistent with prior knowledge regarding these systems.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [6] Mucha PJ, Richardson T, Macon K, Porter MA, Onnela JP. Community structure in time-dependent, multiscale, and multiplex networks. Science. 2010;328(5980):876–878. doi: 10.1126/science.1184819. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
The trail-making test B measures executive flexibility by capturing the subject's cognitive ability to switch between task demands.
“We directly tested the relationship between frontal integration and cognitive flexibility using behavioral scores on the trail-making test B (TMT-B), which measures executive flexibility by capturing the subject's cognitive ability to switch between task demands.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The digit span backward task captures temporary information storage and the active manipulation of stored items.
“we tested the relationship between frontal integration and performance on a digit span backward task, which captures temporary information storage and the active manipulation of stored items.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The n-back task is a valid manipulation of working memory/executive cognition.
“during a working-memory challenge (the “n-back” task)”
The paper relies on this without support.
A large score on the TMT-B task indicates poor task switching ability, and a small score indicates good task switching ability.
“A large score on the TMT-B task (as measured by the time to complete the task) indicates poor task switching ability, and a small score indicates good task switching ability.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The digit span forward task does not require active information manipulation.
“which does not require active information manipulation.”
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?
In the citing paper
“There is evidence that this property is important for executive functioning, learning, and switching between challenging task demands (Bassett et al., 2011; Braun et al., 2015; Chen et al., 2016).”
From Development of large-scale functional networks from birth to adulthood: A guide to the neuroimaging literature (2017) · cites this paper as Braun et al., 2015
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Not confirmedt(343) = 2.259reported p < .024 · recomputed p = .025
“t(343) = 2.259, p < .024”
- Not confirmedt(343) = 2.974reported p < .003 · recomputed p = .003
“t(343) = 2.974, p < .003”
- ConsistentF(2, 343) = 20.75reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(2,343) = 20.75, p < .001”
- Consistentt(343) = 1.31reported p = .19 · recomputed p = .191
“t(343) = 1.31, p = .19”
- Consistentt(343) = -10.32reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(343) = −10.32, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(8, 343) = 29.95reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(8,343) = 29.95, p < .001”
- Consistentt(343) = 9.42reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(343) = 9.42, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(7, 343) = 11.75reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(7,343) = 11.75, p < .001”
- Consistentt(343) = 4.98reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(343) = 4.98, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 343) = 6.25reported p < .013 · recomputed p = .013
“F(1,343) = 6.25, p < .013”
- ConsistentF(1, 343) = 16.5reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,343) = 16.5, p < .001”
- Consistentt(343) = 2reported p = .045 · recomputed p = .046
“t(343) = 2.0, p = .045”
- ConsistentF(1, 343) = 64.6reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,343) = 64.6, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 343) = 21.8reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,343) = 21.8, p < .001”
- ConsistentF(1, 343) = 196.8reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“F(1,343) = 196.8, p < .001”
- Consistentt(343) = 6.97reported p < .001 · recomputed p < .001
“t(343) = 6.97, p < .001”
- Consistentt(343) = -0.44reported p = .66 · recomputed p = .660
“t(343) = −0.44, p = .66”
- Consistentt(343) = -0.417reported p < .677 · recomputed p = .677
“t(343) = −0.417, p < .677”
- Consistentt(343) = -0.742reported p < .459 · recomputed p = .459
“t(343) = −0.742, p < .459”
- Consistentt(343) = 0.573reported p < .567 · recomputed p = .567
“t(343) = 0.573, p < .567”
- Consistentt(343) = -0.204reported p < .839 · recomputed p = .838
“t(343) = −0.204, p < .839”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Incorrect denominator degrees of freedom for the condition ANOVA
MinorFor a repeated-measures ANOVA with 344 subjects and a condition numerator degree of freedom of 2, the uncorrected denominator degree of freedom is 2 × (344 − 1) = 686, not 343.
Reported 343 · recomputed 686
“repeated-measures ANOVA with condition as factor: F(2,343) = 20.75, P < 0.001”
Incorrect denominator degrees of freedom for the module ANOVA
MinorFor the stated repeated-measures ANOVA across modules in 344 subjects, a numerator degree of freedom of 8 gives an uncorrected denominator degree of freedom of 8 × 343 = 2,744, not 343. The analogous 0-back result, F(7,343), has the same issue.
Reported 343 · recomputed 2744
“repeated-measures ANOVA with modules as categorical factor: F(8,343) = 29.95, P < 0.001”
Overlapping-window percentage is incorrect
MinorFourteen of 15 volumes is 93.3%, not 91%.
Reported 91 · recomputed 93.333333
“As the overlap of the time series is large (14/15 volumes = 91%)”
Path length within task blocks is described in opposite ways
MinorThe text first says path length is shortest within task blocks, then interprets the within-block results as showing an increased path length.
“the path length is longest between task blocks and shortest within task blocks.”
“within task blocks, network reconfiguration mainly takes place between modules, thus resulting in a lower clustering coefficient and an increased path length.”
Citations
Cites
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1006/cogp.1999.0734 · Cited by 15,798
An Integrative Theory of Prefrontal Cortex Function
Miller, E. K., & Cohen, J. D. (2001) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.24.1.167 · Cited by 12,803
The organization of the human cerebral cortex estimated by intrinsic functional connectivity
Thomas Yeo, B. T., Krienen, F. M., Sepulcre, J., Sabuncu, M. R., Lashkari, D., Hollinshead, M., Roffman, J. L., Smoller, J. W., Zöllei, L., Polimeni, J. R., et al. (2011) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.00338.2011 · Cited by 9,182
The organization of the human cerebellum estimated by intrinsic functional connectivity
Buckner, R. L., Krienen, F. M., Castellanos, A., Diaz, J. C., & Yeo, B. T. T. (2011) · Journal of Neurophysiology · doi:10.1152/jn.00339.2011 · Cited by 7,304
Working memory: Looking back and looking forward
Baddeley, A. (2003) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1201 · Cited by 5,200
Functional Network Organization of the Human Brain
Power, J. D., Cohen, A. L., Nelson, S. M., Wig, G. S., Barnes, K. A., Church, J. A., Vogel, A. C., Laumann, T. O., Miezin, F. M., Schlaggar, B. L., et al. (2011) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2011.09.006 · Cited by 4,124
N-back working memory paradigm: a meta-analysis of normative functional neuroimaging studies.
Owen, A. M., McMillan, K. M., Laird, A. R., & Bullmore, E. (2005) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.20131 · Cited by 3,560
Dynamic functional connectivity: Promise, issues, and interpretations
Hutchison, R. M., Womelsdorf, T., Allen, E. A., Bandettini, P. A., Calhoun, V. D., Corbetta, M., Della Penna, S., Duyn, J. H., Glover, G. H., Gonzalez-Castillo, J., et al. (2013) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05.079 · Cited by 2,962
Holme, P., & Saramäki, J. (2012) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.03.001 · Cited by 2,736
Towards a cognitive neuroscience of consciousness: basic evidence and a workspace framework
Dehaene, S. (2001) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00123-2 · Cited by 2,498
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- R Amthauer, B Brocke, D Liepmann, A Beauducel Intelligenz-Struktur-Test 2000: IST 2000 (Hogrefe and Huber, Göttingen, Germany, 1999).
- 10.1038/nn.3993 · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 301–400 of 790
Time-evolving dynamics in brain networks forecast responses to health messaging
Cooper, N., Garcia, J. O., Tompson, S., O’Donnell, M. B., Falk, E. B., & Vettel, J. M. (2018) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00058 · Cited by 22
Graphlets in Multiplex Networks
Dimitrova, T., Petrovski, K., & Kocarev, L. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-57609-3 · Cited by 20
Sinha, N., Berg, C. N., Yassa, M. A., & Gluck, M. A. (2020) · Neurobiology of Learning and Memory · doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2020.107340 · Cited by 21
Cui, X., Ding, C., Wei, J., Xue, J., Wang, X., Wang, B., & Xiang, J. (2021) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhab133 · Cited by 21
Optimal Control Costs of Brain State Transitions in Linear Stochastic Systems
Kamiya, S., Kawakita, G., Sasai, S., Kitazono, J., & Oizumi, M. (2022) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.1053-22.2022 · Cited by 20
Shadpour, S., Shafqat, A., Toy, S., Jing, Z., Attwood, K. M., Moussavi, Z., & Shafiei, S. B. (2023) · npj Aging · doi:10.1038/s41514-023-00119-z · Cited by 23
On the variability of dynamic functional connectivity assessment methods
Torabi, M., Mitsis, G. D., & Poline, J. (2024) · GigaScience · doi:10.1093/gigascience/giae009 · Cited by 23
How neuroscience can inform the study of individual differences in cognitive abilities
McFarland, D. J. (2017) · Reviews in the Neurosciences · doi:10.1515/revneuro-2016-0073 · Cited by 23
Bahrami, M., Laurienti, P. J., Quandt, S. A., Talton, J. W., Pope, C., Summers, P., Burdette, J. H., Chen, H., Liu, J., Howard, T. D., et al. (2017) · NeuroToxicology · doi:10.1016/j.neuro.2017.06.001 · Cited by 20
Breaking down the cocktail party: Attentional modulation of cerebral audiovisual speech processing
Wikman, P. A., Sahari, E., Salmela, V. R., Leminen, A., Leminen, M., Laine, M., & Alho, K. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.117365 · Cited by 21
Ding, C., Xiang, J., Cui, X., Wang, X., Li, D., Chen, C., & Wang, B. (2020) · Journal of Attention Disorders · doi:10.1177/1087054720959712 · Cited by 19
Yin, D., Wang, X. J., Zhang, X., Yu, Q., Wei, Y., Cai, Q., Fan, M., & Li, L. (2021) · Brain Structure and Function · doi:10.1007/s00429-021-02304-w · Cited by 20
Braun, U., Harneit, A., Pergola, G., Menara, T., Schaefer, A., Betzel, R. F., Zang, Z., Schweiger, J. I., Schwarz, K., Chen, J., et al. (2019) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/679670 · Cited by 20
Self-citationDynamic Language Network in Early and Late Cantonese–Mandarin Bilinguals
Liu, X., Tu, L., Chen, X., Zhong, M., Niu, M., Zhao, L., Lu, Z., & Huang, R. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01189 · Cited by 19
Dowdle, L. T., Ghose, G. M., Chen, C. C. C., Uǧurbil, K., Yacoub, E. S., & Vizioli, L. (2021) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.pneurobio.2021.102171 · Cited by 23
Yin, S., Li, Y., & Chen, A. (2022) · Brain Structure and Function · doi:10.1007/s00429-022-02517-7 · Cited by 19
A spatio-temporal decomposition framework for dynamic functional connectivity in the human brain
Xiao, J., Uddin, L. Q., Meng, Y., Li, L., Gao, L., Shan, X., Huang, X., Liao, W., Chen, H., & Duan, X. (2022) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2022.119618 · Cited by 19
Arbabyazd, L., Petkoski, S., Breakspear, M. J., Solodkin, A., Battaglia, D. A., & Jirsa, V. (2023) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00332 · Cited by 23
Brain Map of Intrinsic Functional Flexibility in Anesthetized Monkeys and Awake Humans
Yin, D., Zhang, Z., Wang, Z., Zeljic, K., Lv, Q., Cai, D.-C., Wang, Y., & Wang, Z. (2019) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2019.00174 · Cited by 20
Sun, J., Zhang, Q., Li, Y., Meng, J., Chen, Q., Yang, W., Wei, D., & Qiu, J. (2019) · Brain Imaging and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11682-019-00077-9 · Cited by 20
Complementary topology of maintenance and manipulation brain networks in working memory
Davis, S. W., Crowell, C. A., Beynel, L., Deng, L., Lakhlani, D., Hilbig, S. A., Lim, W., Palmer, H., Nguyen, D., Peterchev, A. V., et al. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-35887-2 · Cited by 19
Interaction of Cannabis Use and Aging: From Molecule to Mind
Yoo, H. B., DiMuzio, J. M., & Filbey, F. M. (2019) · Journal of Dual Diagnosis · doi:10.1080/15504263.2019.1665218 · Cited by 21
Dysfunctional Dynamics of Intra- and Inter-network Connectivity in Dementia With Lewy Bodies
Ma, W., Yao, Q., Hu, G., Xiao, C., Shi, J., & Chen, J. (2019) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2019.01265 · Cited by 19
State-dependent signatures of anti- N -methyl- d -aspartate receptor encephalitis
von Schwanenflug, N., Krohn, S., Heine, J., Paul, F., Prüß, H., & Finke, C. (2022) · Brain Communications · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcab298 · Cited by 21
Identifying a task-invariant cognitive reserve network using task potency
van Loenhoud, A. C., Habeck, C. G., van der Flier, W. M., Ossenkoppele, R., & Stern, Y. (2020) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116593 · Cited by 23
Combrisson, E., Basanisi, R., Neri, M., Auzias, G., Petri, G., Marinazzo, D., Panzeri, S., & Brovelli, A. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-62507-1 · Cited by 19
Zhang, H., Meng, C., Di, X., Wu, X., & Biswal, B. B. (2023) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00314 · Cited by 19
Mindfulness Meditation and Network Neuroscience: Review, Synthesis, and Future Directions
Prakash, R. S., Shankar, A., Tripathi, V., Yang, W. F. Z., Fisher, M. E., Bauer, C. C. C., Betzel, R. F., & Sacchet, M. D. (2024) · Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging · doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2024.11.005 · Cited by 24
Resting-state network topology and planning ability in healthy adults
Vriend, C., Wagenmakers, M. J., van den Heuvel, O. A., & van der Werf, Y. D. (2019) · Brain Structure and Function · doi:10.1007/s00429-019-02004-6 · Cited by 19
Monteiro, T. S., Adab, H. Z., Chalavi, S., Gooijers, J., King, B. R., Cuypers, K., Mantini, D., & Swinnen, S. P. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhaa021 · Cited by 17
Standage, D., Areshenkoff, C. N., Nashed, J. Y., Hutchison, R. M., Hutchison, M., Heinke, D. G., Menon, R. S., Everling, S., & Gallivan, J. P. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhaa085 · Cited by 17
Bi, X.-A., Xu, Q., Luo, X., Sun, Q., & Wang, Z. (2018) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2018.00716 · Cited by 18
Controversies and progress on standardization of large-scale brain network nomenclaturePreprint
Uddin, L. Q., Betzel, R. F., Cohen, J. R., Damoiseaux, J. S., Brigard, F. D., Eickhoff, S. B., Fornito, A., Gratton, C., Gordon, E. M., Laird, A., et al. (2022) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/25za6 · Cited by 18
Allocentric representation in the human amygdala and ventral visual stream
Evensmoen, H. R., Rimol, L. M., Winkler, A. M., Betzel, R. F., Hansen, T. I., Nili, H., & Haberg, A. K. (2021) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108658 · Cited by 17
Network controllability mediates the relationship between rigid structure and flexible dynamics
Gu, S., Fotiadis, P., Parkes, L., Xia, C. H., Gur, R. C., Gur, R. E., Roalf, D. R., Satterthwaite, T. D., & Bassett, D. S. (2021) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00225 · Cited by 17
Self-citationFateh, A. A., Huang, W., Mo, T., Wang, X., Luo, Y., Yang, B., Smahi, A., Fang, D., Zhang, L., Meng, X., et al. (2022) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2022.890596 · Cited by 17
Sasse, L., Larabi, D. I., Omidvarnia, A., Jung, K., Hoffstaedter, F., Jocham, G., Eickhoff, S. B., & Patil, K. R. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-05073-w · Cited by 17
Huang, Y., Shen, C., Zhao, W., Zhang, H., Li, C., Ju, C., Ouyang, R., & Liu, J. (2023) · Sleep Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.sleep.2023.10.035 · Cited by 18
Feng, G., Chen, R., Zhao, R., Li, Y., Ma, L., Wang, Y., Men, W., Gao, J., Tan, S., Cheng, J., et al. (2023) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-023-05647-8 · Cited by 18
Network Modularity as a Foundation for Neural Reuse
Stanley, M. L., Gessell, B. S., & Brigard, F. D. (2018) · Philosophy of Science · doi:10.1086/701037 · Cited by 16
How Dynamic Brain Networks Tune Social Behavior in Real Time
Silston, B., Bassett, D. S., & Mobbs, D. (2018) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721418773362 · Cited by 18
Self-citationSu, J., Ban, S., Wang, M., Hua, F., Wang, L., Cheng, X., Tang, Y., Zhou, H., Zhai, Y., Du, X., et al. (2019) · The Journal of Headache and Pain · doi:10.1186/s10194-019-1052-6 · Cited by 17
The interpreter's brain during rest — Hyperconnectivity in the frontal lobe
Klein, C., Metz, S. I., Elmer, S., & Jäncke, L. (2018) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0202600 · Cited by 20
Zhou, T., Kang, J., Cong, F., & Li, X. (2020) · Neurocomputing · doi:10.1016/j.neucom.2020.01.071 · Cited by 17
Using Low-Dimensional Manifolds to Map Relationships Between Dynamic Brain Networks
Bahrami, M., Lyday, R. G., Casanova, R., Burdette, J. H., Simpson, S. L., & Laurienti, P. J. (2019) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2019.00430 · Cited by 16
Network neuroscience and the connectomics revolution
Betzel, R. F. (2021) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-821861-7.00002-6 · Cited by 18
Longitudinal network re-organization across learning and development
McCormick, E. M., Peters, S., Crone, E. A., & Telzer, E. H. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.117784 · Cited by 20
Trapped: rigidity in psychiatric disorders
Servaas, M. N., Schoevers, R. A., Bringmann, L. F., van Tol, M., & Riese, H. (2021) · The Lancet Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s2215-0366(21)00353-9 · Cited by 16
Analysis of population functional connectivity data via multilayer network embeddings
Wilson, J. D., Baybay, M., Sankar, R., Stillman, P. E., & Popa, A. M. (2020) · Network Science · doi:10.1017/nws.2020.39 · Cited by 18
Lee, B., Young, C. B., Cai, W., Yuan, R., Ryman, S. G., Kim, J., Yang, L., Henderson, V. W., Poston, K. L., & Menon, V. (2025) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-025-56660-w · Cited by 15
Morin, T., Moore, K. N., Isenburg, K., Ma, W., & Stern, C. E. (2022) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac457 · Cited by 17
Heckner, M. K., Cieslik, E. C., Patil, K. R., Gell, M., Eickhoff, S. B., Hoffstaedter, F., & Langner, R. (2023) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhac520 · Cited by 14
Aberrant brain dynamics of large-scale functional networks across schizophrenia and mood disorder
Ishida, T., Yamada, S., Yasuda, K., Uenishi, S., Tamaki, A., Tabata, M., Ikeda, N., Takahashi, S., & Kimoto, S. (2024) · NeuroImage Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2024.103574 · Cited by 15
A Novel Synchronization-Based Approach for Functional Connectivity Analysis
Lombardi, A., Tangaro, S., Bellotti, R., Bertolino, A., Blasi, G., Pergola, G., Taurisano, P., & Guaragnella, C. (2017) · Complexity · doi:10.1155/2017/7190758 · Cited by 15
Sperry, M. M., Granquist, E. J., & Winkelstein, B. A. (2020) · Pain · doi:10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002010 · Cited by 14
Liu, M., Backer, R., Amey, R. C., Splan, E. D., Magerman, A. B., & Forbes, C. E. (2020) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhaa349 · Cited by 15
Zhang, Y., Li, C., Chen, D., Tian, R., Yan, X., Zhou, Y., Song, Y., Yang, Y., Wang, X., Zhou, B., et al. (2022) · Journal of Alzheimer s Disease · doi:10.3233/jad-220539 · Cited by 15
Oscillatory wavelet-patterns in complex data: mutual estimation of frequencies and energy dynamics
Simonyan, M. A., Fisun, A. V., Афанасьева, Г. А., Glushkovskaya-Semyachkina, O. V., Андреевна, Б. И., Selskii, A. O., Zhuravlev, M. О., & Евгеньевна, Р. А. (2022) · The European Physical Journal Special Topics · doi:10.1140/epjs/s11734-022-00737-w · Cited by 15
Regions of Interest as nodes of dynamic functional brain networks
Ryyppö, E., Glerean, E., Brattico, E., Saramäki, J., & Korhonen, O. (2018) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00047 · Cited by 16
Echoes of Affective Stimulation in Brain connectivity Networks
Borchardt, V., Fan, Y., Dietz, M., Herrera-Meléndez, A. L., Bajbouj, M., Gärtner, M., Li, M., Walter, M., & Grimm, S. (2017) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhx290 · Cited by 15
Functional cerebral asymmetry analyses reveal how the control system implements its flexibility
Chen, Z., Zhao, X., Fan, J., & Chen, A. (2018) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.24313 · Cited by 15
Kim, S., Mueller, K., Lepsien, J., Mildner, T., & Fritz, T. H. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-55781-9 · Cited by 16
Abdallah, M., Farrugia, N., Chirokoff, V., & Chanraud, S. (2020) · Network Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/netn_a_00149 · Cited by 16
Lin, S., Kolind, S., Liu, A., McMullen, K., Vavasour, I. M., Wang, Z., Traboulsee, A. L., & McKeown, M. J. (2020) · Frontiers in Neurology · doi:10.3389/fneur.2020.00407 · Cited by 16
Bertolero, M. A., & Bassett, D. S. (2019) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/jcuv3 · Cited by 15
Self-citationNetwork Analysis in Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders
Pontillo, G., Barrantes-Cepas, M., Broeders, T. A. A., Koubiyr, I., & Schoonheim, M. M. (2024) · Neuroimaging Clinics of North America · doi:10.1016/j.nic.2024.03.008 · Cited by 13
Predictive modeling of neurobehavioral state and trait variation across development
Sanchez–Alonso, S., & Aslin, R. Ν. (2020) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100855 · Cited by 13
Reliable change in neuropsychological test scores is associated with brain atrophy in older adults
Lin, S. S. ‐., Fletcher, E. M., Gavett, B. E., & Initiative, A. D. N. (2020) · Journal of Neuropsychology · doi:10.1111/jnp.12226 · Cited by 14
Supekar, K., Chang, H., Mistry, P. K., Iuculano, T., & Menon, V. (2021) · Communications Biology · doi:10.1038/s42003-021-01872-1 · Cited by 18
Rossi, C., Roemmich, R. T., Schweighofer, N., Bastian, A. J., & Leech, K. A. (2021) · Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnagi.2021.729284 · Cited by 17
Early bilateral and massive compromise of the frontal lobes
Ibáñez, A. M., Zimerman, M., Sedeño, L., Lori, N. F., Rapacioli, M., Cardona, J. F., Suárez-García, D. M. A., Herrera, E., García, A. M., & Manes, F. F. (2018) · NeuroImage Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2018.02.026 · Cited by 14
Tommasin, S., Mascali, D., Moraschi, M., Gili, T., Hassan, I. E., Fratini, M., DiNuzzo, M., Wise, R. G., Mangia, S., Macaluso, E., et al. (2018) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.06.006 · Cited by 15
Smith, K., Spyrou, L., & Escudero, J. (2018) · IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing · doi:10.1109/tsp.2018.2881658 · Cited by 14
Thompson, W. H., Kastrati, G., Finc, K., Wright, J., Shine, J. M., & Poldrack, R. A. (2020) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.24950 · Cited by 14
Pathologically reduced neural flexibility recovers during psychotherapy of OCD patients
Schiepek, G., Viol, K., Aas, B., Kastinger, A., Kronbichler, M., Schöller, H., Reiter, E.-M., Said-Yürekli, S., Kronbichler, L., Kravanja-Spannberger, B., et al. (2021) · NeuroImage: Clinical · doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2021.102844 · Cited by 13
Rogala, J., Dreszer, J., Malinowska, U., Waligóra, M., Pluta, A., Antonova, I., & Wróbel, A. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-96718-5 · Cited by 13
Deep Multitask Learning with Progressive Parameter Sharing
Shi, H., Ren, S., Zhang, T., & Pan, S. J. (2023) · IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) · doi:10.1109/iccv51070.2023.01824 · Cited by 13
Cortical sites critical to language function act as connectors between language subnetworks
Hsieh, J. K., Prakash, P., Flint, R. D., Fitzgerald, Z. B., Mugler, E. M., Wang, Y., Crone, N. E., Templer, J. W., Rosenow, J. M., Tate, M. C., et al. (2024) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-024-51839-z · Cited by 14
Baene, W. D., Jansma, M., Schouwenaars, I. T., Rutten, G.-J. M., & Sitskoorn, M. M. (2019) · Brain Imaging and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11682-019-00189-2 · Cited by 13
Dynamic reconfiguration of human brain networks across altered states of consciousness
Liu, H., Hu, K., Peng, Y., Tian, X.-H., Wang, M., Ma, B., Wu, Y., Sun, W., Liu, B., Li, A., et al. (2021) · Behavioural Brain Research · doi:10.1016/j.bbr.2021.113685 · Cited by 14
The role of neural flexibility in cognitive aging
Varangis, E. M. L., Qi, W., Stern, Y., & Lee, S. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118784 · Cited by 13
Increased flexibility of brain dynamics in patients with multiple sclerosis
von Schwanenflug, N., Koch, S., Krohn, S., Broeders, T. A. A., Lydon‐Staley, D. M., Bassett, D. S., Schoonheim, M. M., Paul, F., & Finke, C. (2023) · Brain Communications · doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcad143 · Cited by 14
Self-citationContextual and Developmental Differences in the Neural Architecture of Cognitive Control
Petrican, R., & Grady, C. L. (2017) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0667-17.2017 · Cited by 14
On the Influence of Structural Connectivity on the Correlation Patterns and Network Synchronization
Nazemi, P. S., & Jamali, Y. (2019) · Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fncom.2018.00105 · Cited by 13
Shanmugan, S., Cao, W., Satterthwaite, T. D., Sammel, M. D., Ashourvan, A., Bassett, D. S., Ruparel, K., Gur, R. C., Epperson, C. N., & Loughead, J. (2020) · Psychoneuroendocrinology · doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2020.104710 · Cited by 14
Self-citationDimitriadis, S. I., Messaritaki, E., & Jones, D. K. (2021) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.25545 · Cited by 13
Effects of Bergen 4-Day Treatment on Resting-State Graph Features in Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
Thorsen, A. L., Vriend, C., de Wit, S. J., Ousdal, O. T., Hagen, K., Hansen, B. K. A., Kvale, G., & van den Heuvel, O. A. (2020) · Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging · doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2020.01.007 · Cited by 13
Battaglia, D. A., Boudou, T., Hansen, E. C. A., Lombardo, D., Chettouf, S., Daffertshofer, A., McIntosh, A. R., Zimmermann, J., Ritter, P., & Jirsa, V. (2017) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/107243 · Cited by 15
Safron, A., Klimaj, V., & Hipólito, I. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/x734w · Cited by 13
Flexible reconfiguration of functional brain networks as a potential neural mechanism of creativity
Li, J., Orlov, N. D., Wang, Z., Jiao, B., Wang, Y., Xu, H., Yang, H., Huang, Y., Sun, Y. H., Zhang, P., et al. (2020) · Brain Imaging and Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11682-020-00388-2 · Cited by 12
Uemura, J., Hoshino, A., Igarashi, G., Matsui, Y., Chishima, M., & Hoshiyama, M. (2021) · European Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1111/ejn.15388 · Cited by 12
Shaw, D. J., Czekóová, K., Mareček, R., Špiláková, B., & Brázdil, M. (2023) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.119933 · Cited by 15
Development of brain state dynamics involved in working memory
He, Y., Liang, X., Chen, M., Tian, T., Zeng, Y., Liu, J., Lei, H. C., Xu, J., Chen, R., Wang, Y., et al. (2023) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhad022 · Cited by 13
Jin, X., Xu, B., Xu, R., Yin, X., Yan, S., Zhang, Y., & Jin, H. (2023) · European Journal of Psychotraumatology · doi:10.1080/20008066.2023.2258723 · Cited by 12
Yuluğ, B., Ayyıldız, B., Sayman, D., Çankaya, Ş., Duran, U., Ucak, A. D., Karaca, R., Ayyıldız, S., Ozdemir, E., Özşimşek, A., et al. (2024) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2024.120961 · Cited by 13
Dynamic Reconfiguration of Functional Topology in Human Brain Networks: From Resting to Task States
Zhang, W., Tang, F., Zhou, X., & Li, H. (2020) · Neural Plasticity · doi:10.1155/2020/8837615 · Cited by 12
Ngo, G. N., Hori, Y., Everling, S., & Menon, R. S. (2023) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120035 · Cited by 11
Periodic Visual Stimulation Induces Resting-State Brain Network Reconfiguration
Guo, D., Guo, F., Zhang, Y., Li, F., Xia, Y., Xu, P., & Yao, D. (2018) · Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fncom.2018.00021 · Cited by 12
Dimitriadis, S. I., Lancaster, T. M., Perry, G., Tansey, K. E., Jones, D. K., Singh, K. D., Zammit, S., Smith, G. D., Hall, J., O’Donovan, M. C., et al. (2021) · Biological Psychiatry Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging · doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2021.01.007 · Cited by 14
Brain networks in patients with isolated or recurrent transient global amnesia
Kim, J., Lee, D. A., Kim, H. C., Lee, H., & Park, K. M. (2021) · Acta Neurologica Scandinavica · doi:10.1111/ane.13490 · Cited by 12
Metadata
- Authors
- Braun, U., Schäfer, A., Walter, H., Erk, S., Romanczuk-Seiferth, N., Haddad, L., Schweiger, J. I., Grimm, O., Heinz, A., Tost, H., Meyer-Lindenberg, A., & Bassett, D. S.
- Affiliations
- Heidelberg University (DE)
- Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin (DE)
- Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Charité–University Medicine Berlin, Campus Mitte, 10117 Berlin, Germany;
- Central Institute for Mental Health Mannheim, University of Heidelberg, Medical Faculty Mannheim, 68159 Mannheim, Germany;
- University of Pennsylvania (US)
- ORCID
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2015-08-31
- Volume
- 112
- Issue
- 37
- Pages
- 11678-11683
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC4577153
- OpenAlex
- W1907418661
- Cited by
- 791
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 54 · 2025: 89 · 2024: 73 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 63 · 2021: 100 · 2020: 87 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 74 · 2017: 74 · 2016: 41 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 38.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation (MacArthur Award)
- Alfred P. Sloan Foundation (Sloan Fellow)
- DOD | U.S. Army | AMC | U.S. Army Research Laboratory (W911NF-10-2-0022)
- HHS | National Institutes of Health (#2-R01-DC-009209-11)
- DOD | Army Research Office (W911NF-14-1-0679)
- National Science Foundation (BCS-1441502, BCS-1430087)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural dynamics and brain function
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- dynamic network reconfiguration, executive cognition, working memory, n-back task, frontoparietal network, fronto-temporal network, network flexibility, functional brain networks, schizophrenia, dementia
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Brain, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Female, Frontal Lobe, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Memory, Short-Term, Middle Aged, Nerve Net, Young Adult, Executive Function
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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