Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 493

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Network analysis of cortical visual pathways mapped with PET

Open access
McIntosh, AR, Grady, CL, Ungerleider, LG, Haxby, JV, Rapoport, SI, Horwitz, B·1994·The Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

Brain metabolic mapping techniques, such as positron emission tomography (PET), can provide information about the functional interactions within entire neural systems. With the large quantity of data that can accumulate from a mapping study, a network analysis, which makes sense of the complex interactions among neural elements, is necessary. A network analysis was performed on data obtained from a PET study that examined both the changes in regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) and interregional correlations among human cortical areas during performance of an object vision (face matching) and spatial vision (dot- location matching) task. Brain areas for the network were selected based on regions showing significant rCBF or interregional correlations between tasks. Anterior temporal and frontal lobe regions were added to the network using a principal components analysis. Interactions among selected regions were quantified with structural equation modeling. In the structural equation models, connections between brain areas were based on known neuroanatomy and the interregional correlations were used to calculate path coefficients representing the magnitude of the influence of each directional path. The combination of the anatomical network and interregional correlations created a functional network for each task. The functional network for the right hemisphere showed that in the object vision task, dominant path influences were among occipitotemporal areas, while in the spatial vision task, occipitoparietal interactions were stronger. The network for the spatial vision task also had a strong feedback path from area 46 to occipital cortex, an effect that was absent in the object vision task. There were strong interactions between dorsal and ventral pathways in both networks. Functional networks for the left hemisphere did not differ between tasks. Networks for the interhemispheric interactions showed that the dominant pathway in the right hemisphere also had stronger effects on homologous left hemisphere areas and are consistent with a hypothesis that intrahemispheric interactions were greater in the right hemisphere in both tasks, and that these influences were transmitted callosally to the left hemisphere.

Overview

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 · 10.1523/jneurosci.14-02-00655.1994

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
McIntosh, A., Grady, C., Ungerleider, L., Haxby, J., Rapoport, S., & Horwitz, B.
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Published
1994-02-01
Volume
14
Issue
2
Pages
655-666
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
OpenAlex
W1655108579
Cited by
493
References
2
FWCI
16.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.