↓ Skip to main content

Resting state cortico-cerebellar functional connectivity networks: a comparison of anatomical and self-organizing map approaches

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (54th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
299 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Resting state cortico-cerebellar functional connectivity networks: a comparison of anatomical and self-organizing map approaches
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroanatomy, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnana.2012.00031
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jessica A. Bernard, Rachael D. Seidler, Kelsey M. Hassevoort, Bryan L. Benson, Robert C. Welsh, Jillian Lee Wiggins, Susanne M. Jaeggi, Martin Buschkuehl, Christopher S. Monk, John Jonides, Scott J. Peltier

Abstract

The cerebellum plays a role in a wide variety of complex behaviors. In order to better understand the role of the cerebellum in human behavior, it is important to know how this structure interacts with cortical and other subcortical regions of the brain. To date, several studies have investigated the cerebellum using resting-state functional connectivity magnetic resonance imaging (fcMRI; Krienen and Buckner, 2009; O'Reilly et al., 2010; Buckner et al., 2011). However, none of this work has taken an anatomically-driven lobular approach. Furthermore, though detailed maps of cerebral cortex and cerebellum networks have been proposed using different network solutions based on the cerebral cortex (Buckner et al., 2011), it remains unknown whether or not an anatomical lobular breakdown best encompasses the networks of the cerebellum. Here, we used fcMRI to create an anatomically-driven connectivity atlas of the cerebellar lobules. Timecourses were extracted from the lobules of the right hemisphere and vermis. We found distinct networks for the individual lobules with a clear division into "motor" and "non-motor" regions. We also used a self-organizing map (SOM) algorithm to parcellate the cerebellum. This allowed us to investigate redundancy and independence of the anatomically identified cerebellar networks. We found that while anatomical boundaries in the anterior cerebellum provide functional subdivisions of a larger motor grouping defined using our SOM algorithm, in the posterior cerebellum, the lobules were made up of sub-regions associated with distinct functional networks. Together, our results indicate that the lobular boundaries of the human cerebellum are not necessarily indicative of functional boundaries, though anatomical divisions can be useful. Additionally, driving the analyses from the cerebellum is key to determining the complete picture of functional connectivity within the structure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 299 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 7 2%
Italy 2 <1%
Korea, Republic of 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Czechia 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 283 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 71 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 69 23%
Student > Master 29 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 22 7%
Professor 18 6%
Other 50 17%
Unknown 40 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 74 25%
Psychology 53 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 36 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 31 10%
Engineering 13 4%
Other 37 12%
Unknown 55 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2012.
All research outputs
#14,087,875
of 22,675,759 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#641
of 1,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,078
of 244,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroanatomy
#16
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,675,759 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,153 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.