↓ Skip to main content

Lagged and instantaneous dynamical influences related to brain structural connectivity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
14 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
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
Lagged and instantaneous dynamical influences related to brain structural connectivity
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01024
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carmen Alonso-Montes, Ibai Diez, Lakhdar Remaki, Iñaki Escudero, Beatriz Mateos, Yves Rosseel, Daniele Marinazzo, Sebastiano Stramaglia, Jesus M. Cortes

Abstract

Contemporary neuroimaging methods can shed light on the basis of human neural and cognitive specializations, with important implications for neuroscience and medicine. Indeed, different MRI acquisitions provide different brain networks at the macroscale; whilst diffusion-weighted MRI (dMRI) provides a structural connectivity (SC) coincident with the bundles of parallel fibers between brain areas, functional MRI (fMRI) accounts for the variations in the blood-oxygenation-level-dependent T2(*) signal, providing functional connectivity (FC). Understanding the precise relation between FC and SC, that is, between brain dynamics and structure, is still a challenge for neuroscience. To investigate this problem, we acquired data at rest and built the corresponding SC (with matrix elements corresponding to the fiber number between brain areas) to be compared with FC connectivity matrices obtained by three different methods: directed dependencies by an exploratory version of structural equation modeling (eSEM), linear correlations (C) and partial correlations (PC). We also considered the possibility of using lagged correlations in time series; in particular, we compared a lagged version of eSEM and Granger causality (GC). Our results were two-fold: firstly, eSEM performance in correlating with SC was comparable to those obtained from C and PC, but eSEM (not C, nor PC) provides information about directionality of the functional interactions. Second, interactions on a time scale much smaller than the sampling time, captured by instantaneous connectivity methods, are much more related to SC than slow directed influences captured by the lagged analysis. Indeed the performance in correlating with SC was much worse for GC and for the lagged version of eSEM. We expect these results to supply further insights to the interplay between SC and functional patterns, an important issue in the study of brain physiology and function.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 2%
Cuba 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Unknown 44 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 28%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 5 11%
Professor 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 11 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 7 15%
Engineering 6 13%
Psychology 5 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 11 23%
Unknown 13 28%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 02 June 2021.
All research outputs
#4,623,149
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#7,510
of 31,443 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,975
of 265,409 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#168
of 573 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,443 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
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 265,409 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 573 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 70% of its contemporaries.