Restricted accessReview articleFirst published online 2024-02
Attention Please! Unravelling the Link Between Brain Network Connectivity and Cognitive Attention Following Acquired Brain Injury: A Systematic Review of Structural and Functional Measures
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke are the most common causes of acquired brain injury (ABI), annually affecting 69 million and 15 million people, respectively. Following ABI, the relationship between brain network disruption and common cognitive issues including attention dysfunction is heterogenous. Using PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed 43 studies published by February 2023 that reported correlations between attention and connectivity. Across all ages and stages of recovery, following TBI, greater attention was associated with greater structural efficiency within/between executive control network (ECN), salience network (SN), and default mode network (DMN) and greater functional connectivity (fc) within/between ECN and DMN, indicating DMN interference. Following stroke, greater attention was associated with greater structural connectivity (sc) within ECN; or greater fc within the dorsal attention network (DAN). In childhood ABI populations, decreases in structural network segregation were associated with greater attention. Longitudinal recovery from TBI was associated with normalization of DMN activity, and in stroke, normalization of DMN and DAN activity. Results improve clinical understanding of attention-related connectivity changes after ABI. Recommendations for future research include increased use of electroencephalography (EEG) and functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) to measure connectivity at the point of care, standardized attention and connectivity outcome measures and analysis pipelines, detailed reporting of patient symptomatology, and casual analysis of attention-related connectivity using brain stimulation.
Impact statement
This systematic review concisely and meaningfully synthesizes a large heterogenous body of research relating to the association between attention and brain connectivity to identify clear trends in traumatic brain injury (TBI) and stroke and recommend a path forward in clinical prognosis in children and adults. We consider a broad range of structural and functional connectivity measures (e.g., diffusion tensor imaging [DTI], functional magnetic resonance imaging [fMRI], electroencephalography [EEG], and functional near-infrared spectroscopy [fNIRS]) and analyses (e.g., voxel- and region of interest [ROI]-based, graph theory, network-based statistics, and others) and examine both cognitive and behavioral measures of attention (e.g., executive, spatial or sustained attention, or inhibition), and conclude with recommendations for further research and clinical practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abdul RahmanMR, Abd HamidAI, NohNA, et al.Alteration in the functional organization of the default mode network following closed non-severe traumatic brain injury. Front Neurosci, 2022; 16:212.
2.
AllegraM, FavarettoC, MetcalfN, et al.Stroke-related alterations in inter-areal communication. Neuroimage Clin, 2021; 32:102812.
3.
AlvesPN, ForkelSJ, CorbettaM, et al.The subcortical and neurochemical organization of the ventral and dorsal attention networks. Commun Biol, 2022; 5(1):1–14.
4.
AndersonP. Assessment and development of executive function (EF) during childhood. Child Neuropsychol, 2002; 8(2):71–82.
AronAR. From reactive to proactive and selective control: Developing a richer model for stopping inappropriate responses. Biol Psychiatry, 2011; 69(12):e55–e68.
7.
AronAR, PoldrackRA. Cortical and subcortical contributions to stop signal response inhibition: Role of the subthalamic nucleus. J Neurosci, 2006; 26(9):2424–2433.
8.
AvantsB. Canonical templates for functional brain networks. 2015. Available from: https://figshare.com/articles/dataset/fmri_network_templates/2059257 [Last accessed: December19, 2023].
9.
BagarinaoE, WatanabeH, MaesawaS, et al.Reorganization of brain networks and its association with general cognitive performance over the adult lifespan. Sci Rep, 2019; 9(1):1–15.
10.
BaldassarreA, RamseyL, HackerCL, et al.Large-scale changes in network interactions as a physiological signature of spatial neglect. Brain, 2014; 137(Pt 12):3267–3283; doi: 10.1093/brain/awu297
11.
BaldassarreA, RamseyL, RengacharyJ, et al.Dissociated functional connectivity profiles for motor and attention deficits in acute right-hemisphere stroke. Brain, 2016; 139(Pt 7):2024–2038; doi: 10.1093/brain/aww107
12.
BarkleyRA. Behavioral inhibition, sustained attention, and executive functions: Constructing a unifying theory of ADHD. Psychol Bull, 1997; 121(1):65.
BaumGL, CiricR, RoalfDR, et al.Modular segregation of structural brain networks supports the development of executive function in youth. Curr Biol, 2017; 27(11):1561.e8–1572.e8.
15.
BaumGL, CuiZ, RoalfDR, et al.Development of structure–function coupling in human brain networks during youth. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2020; 117(1):771–778.
BonnelleV, HamTE, LeechR, et al.Salience network integrity predicts default mode network function after traumatic brain injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2012; 109(12):4690–4695; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1113455109
BrovelliA, DingM, LedbergA, et al.Beta oscillations in a large-scale sensorimotor cortical network: Directional influences revealed by Granger causality. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2004; 101(26):9849–9854.
20.
BullmoreE, SpornsO. The economy of brain network organization. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2012; 13(5):336–349.
21.
CaeyenberghsK, LeemansA, LeunissenI, et al.Altered structural networks and executive deficits in traumatic brain injury patients. Brain Struct Funct, 2014; 219(1):193–209; doi: 10.1007/s00429-012-0494-2
22.
CaeyenberghsK, WenderothN, Smits-EngelsmanB, et al.Neural correlates of motor dysfunction in children with traumatic brain injury: Exploration of compensatory recruitment patterns. Brain, 2009; 132(3):684–694.
23.
CampbellM, McKenzieJE, SowdenA, et al.Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: Reporting guideline. BMJ, 2020; 368:l6890.
24.
CaoM, HalperinJM, LiX. Abnormal functional network topology and its dynamics during sustained attention processing significantly implicate post-TBI attention deficits in children. Brain Sci, 2021a;11(10):1348.
25.
CaoM, LuoY, WuZ, et al.Topological aberrance of structural brain network provides quantitative substrates of post-traumatic brain injury attention deficits in children. Brain Connect, 2021b;11(8):651–662.
26.
CarterAR, AstafievSV, LangCE, et al.Resting interhemispheric functional magnetic resonance imaging connectivity predicts performance after stroke. Ann Neurol, 2010; 67(3):365–375; doi: 10.1002/ana.21905
27.
CarterAR, ShulmanGL, CorbettaM. Why use a connectivity-based approach to study stroke and recovery of function?. Neuroimage, 2012; 62(4):2271–2280; doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.02.070
28.
CassidyTP, BruceDW, LewisS, et al.The association of visual field deficits and visuo-spatial neglect in acute right-hemisphere stroke patients. Age Ageing, 1999; 28(3):257–260.
29.
CorbettaM, KincadeMJ, LewisC, et al.Neural basis and recovery of spatial attention deficits in spatial neglect. Nat Neurosci, 2005; 8(11):1603–1610.
30.
CorbettaM, PatelG, ShulmanGL. The reorienting system of the human brain: From environment to theory of mind. Neuron, 2008; 58(3):306–324.
31.
CorbettaM, ShulmanGL. Control of goal-directed and stimulus-driven attention in the brain. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2002; 3(3):201–215.
32.
CovingtonNV, DuffMC. Heterogeneity is a hallmark of traumatic brain injury, not a limitation: A new perspective on study design in rehabilitation research. Am J Speech Lang Pathol, 2021; 30(2S):974–985.
33.
Dall'AcquaP, JohannesS, MicaL, et al.Functional and structural network recovery after mild traumatic brain injury: A 1-year longitudinal study. Front Hum Neurosci, 2017; 11:280.
34.
DennisEL, JahanshadN, McMahonKL, et al.Development of brain structural connectivity between ages 12 and 30: A 4-Tesla diffusion imaging study in 439 adolescents and adults. Neuroimage, 2013; 64:671–684.
35.
DeVeberG. Canadian pediatric ischemic stroke registry: Analysis of children with arterial ischemic stroke. Ann Neurol, 2000; 48(3):514.
36.
DeVeberG. In pursuit of evidence-based treatments for paediatric stroke: The UK and Chest guidelines. Lancet Neurol, 2005; 4(7):432–436.
37.
DewanMC, RattaniA, GuptaS, et al.Estimating the global incidence of traumatic brain injury. J Neurosurg, 2018; 130(4):1080–1097.
DikmenS, MachamerJ, FannJR, et al.Rates of symptom reporting following traumatic brain injury. J Int Neuropsychol Soc, 2010; 16(3):401–411.
40.
DockreePM, KellySP, RocheRA, et al.Behavioural and physiological impairments of sustained attention after traumatic brain injury. Cogn Brain Res, 2004; 20(3):403–414.
41.
DownesMJ, BrennanML, WilliamsHC, et al.Development of a critical appraisal tool to assess the quality of cross-sectional studies (AXIS). BMJ Open, 2016; 6(12):e011458.
42.
EkkerMS, VerhoevenJI, VaartjesI, et al.Stroke incidence in young adults according to age, subtype, sex, and time trends. Neurology, 2019; 92(21):e2444–e2454.
43.
EspositoF, OttoT, ZijlstraFR, et al.Spatially distributed effects of mental exhaustion on resting-state fMRI networks. PLoS One, 2014; 9(4):e94222.
Ewing-CobbsL, PrasadMR, LandrySH, et al.Executive functions following traumatic brain injury in young children: A preliminary analysis. Dev Neuropsychol, 2004; 26(1):487–512.
46.
FanJ, McCandlissBD, SommerT, et al.Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. J Cogn Neurosci, 2002; 14(3):340–347.
47.
FarahaniFV, KarwowskiW, LighthallNR. Application of graph theory for identifying connectivity patterns in human brain networks: A systematic review. Front Neurosci, 2019; 13:585.
48.
FellrathJ, MottazA, SchniderA, et al.Theta-band functional connectivity in the dorsal fronto-parietal network predicts goal-directed attention. Neuropsychologia, 2016; 92:20–30; doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.07.012
49.
FitzGeraldG, TippettV, SchuetzM, et al.The Queensland trauma plan project. ANZ J Surg, 2008; 78(9):780–783.
50.
FristonKJ. Functional and effective connectivity: A review. Brain Connect, 2011; 1(1):13–36.
51.
GennarelliTA.Head Injury in Man and Experimental Animals: Clinical Aspects. In: Trauma and Regeneration: Special Symposium of the 9th International Congress of Neuropathology, Vienna, September 1982. Springer: Vienna; 1983; pp. 1–13.
52.
GennarelliTA, ThibaultLE, AdamsJH, et al.Diffuse axonal injury and traumatic coma in the primate. Ann Neurol, 1982; 12(6):564–574.
53.
Gonzalez-CastilloJ, BandettiniPA. Task-based dynamic functional connectivity: Recent findings and open questions. Neuroimage, 2018; 180:526–533.
54.
GooijersJ, BeetsIA, AlbouyG, et al.Movement preparation and execution: Differential functional activation patterns after traumatic brain injury. Brain, 2016; 139(9):2469–2485.
55.
GoswamiR, DufortP, TartagliaMC, et al.Frontotemporal correlates of impulsivity and machine learning in retired professional athletes with a history of multiple concussions. Brain Struct Funct, 2016; 221(4):1911–1925; doi: 10.1007/s00429-015-1012-0
56.
GreenwaldBD, BurnettDM, MillerMA. Congenital and acquired brain injury. 1. Brain injury: Epidemiology and pathophysiology. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2003; 84(3Suppl 1):S3–S7.
57.
GuS, SatterthwaiteTD, MedagliaJD, et al.Emergence of system roles in normative neurodevelopment. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2015; 112(44):13681–13686.
58.
GusnardDA, RaichleME. Searching for a baseline: Functional imaging and the resting human brain. Nat Rev Neurosci, 2001; 2(10):685–694.
59.
HarisM, GuptaRK, HusainN, et al.Measurement of DTI metrics in hemorrhagic brain lesions: Possible implication in MRI interpretation. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2006; 24(6):1259–1268.
60.
HarstL, LantzschH, ScheibeM. Theories predicting end-user acceptance of telemedicine use: Systematic review. J Med Internet Res, 2019; 21(5):e13117.
61.
HeBJ, SnyderAZ, VincentJL, et al.Breakdown of functional connectivity in frontoparietal networks underlies behavioral deficits in spatial neglect. Neuron, 2007; 53(6):905–918; doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2007.02.013
62.
HeinenR, VlegelsN, de BresserJ, et al.The cumulative effect of small vessel disease lesions is reflected in structural brain networks of memory clinic patients. Neuroimage Clin, 2018; 19:963–969.
63.
HellyerPJ, ShanahanM, ScottG, et al.The control of global brain dynamics: Opposing actions of frontoparietal control and default mode networks on attention. J Neurosci, 2014; 34(2):451–461.
64.
HillaryF, SlocombJ, HillsE, et al.Changes in resting connectivity during recovery from severe traumatic brain injury. Int J Psychophysiol, 2011; 82(1):115–123.
65.
HooperSR, AlexanderJ, MooreD, et al.Caregiver reports of common symptoms in children following a traumatic brain injury. NeuroRehabilitation, 2004; 19(3):175–189.
66.
IrimiaA, WangB, AylwardSR, et al.Neuroimaging of structural pathology and connectomics in traumatic brain injury: Toward personalized outcome prediction. Neuroimage Clin, 2012; 1(1):1–17; doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2012.08.002
67.
KimDJ, MinBK. Rich-club in the brain's macrostructure: Insights from graph theoretical analysis. Comput Struct Biotechnol J, 2020; 18:1761–1773; doi: 10.1016/j.csbj.2020.06.039
68.
KimE, SeoHG, SeongMY, et al.An exploratory study on functional connectivity after mild traumatic brain injury: Preserved global but altered local organization. Brain Behav, 2022; 12(9):e2735.
69.
KimNY, KastnerS. A biased competition theory for the developmental cognitive neuroscience of visuo-spatial attention. Curr Opin Psychol, 2019; 29:219–228.
70.
KirtonA, WestmacottR, DeveberG. Pediatric stroke: Rehabilitation of focal injury in the developing brain. NeuroRehabilitation, 2007; 22(5):371–382.
71.
KrauzlisRJ, WangL, YuG, et al.What is attention?. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci, 2023; 14(1):e1570.
72.
KumarS, RaoSL, ChandramouliBA, et al.Reduced contribution of executive functions in impaired working memory performance in mild traumatic brain injury patients. Clin Neurol Neurosurg, 2013; 115(8):1326–1332.
73.
LannooE, BrusselmansW, EyndeLV, et al.Epidemiology of acquired brain injury (ABI) in adults: Prevalence of long-term disabilities and the resulting needs for ongoing care in the region of Flanders, Belgium. Brain Inj, 2004; 18(2):203–211.
74.
LanthierS, CarmantL, DavidM, et al.Stroke in children: The coexistence of multiple risk factors predicts poor outcome. Neurology, 2000; 54(2):371.
75.
LarsenN, CraigBT, HilderleyAJ, et al.Frontal interhemispheric structural connectivity, attention, and executive function in children with perinatal stroke. Brain Behav, 2022; 12(1):e2433.
76.
LatoraV, MarchioriM. Efficient behavior of small-world networks. Phys Rev Lett, 2001; 87(19):198701.
77.
Le BihanD, ManginJF, PouponC, et al.Diffusion tensor imaging: Concepts and applications. J Magn Reson Imaging, 2001; 13(4):534–546.
78.
LevinHS, HantenG, ZhangL, et al.Changes in working memory after traumatic brain injury in children. Neuropsychology, 2004; 18(2):240.
79.
LiF, LuL, ChenH, et al.Neuroanatomical and functional alterations of insula in mild traumatic brain injury patients at the acute stage. Brain Imaging Behav, 2020a;14(3):907–916; doi: 10.1007/s11682-019-00053-3
LiX, JiaX, LiuY, et al.Brain dynamics in triple-network interactions and its relation to multiple cognitive impairments in mild traumatic brain injury. Cereb Cortex, 2023; 33(11):6620–6632.
82.
LindseyHM, LazarM, MercuriG, et al.The effects of plasticity-based cognitive rehabilitation on resting-state functional connectivity in chronic traumatic brain injury: A pilot study. NeuroRehabilitation, 2022; 51(1):133–150.
83.
LiuJ, WangC, DiaoQ, et al.Connection disruption underlying attention deficit in subcortical stroke. Radiology, 2018; 288(1):186–194; doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171730
84.
LiuS, ShiC, MaX, et al.Cognitive deficits and rehabilitation mechanisms in mild traumatic brain injury patients revealed by EEG connectivity markers. Clin Neurophysiol, 2021; 132(2):554–567; doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2020.11.034
MacalusoE, FrithCD, DriverJ. Modulation of human visual cortex by crossmodal spatial attention. Science, 2000; 289(5482):1206–1208.
87.
MackworthJF. Vigilance, arousal, and habituation. Psychol Rev, 1968; 75(4):308.
88.
MarkovicG, BartfaiA, EkholmJ, et al.Daily management of attention dysfunction two–four years after brain injury and early cognitive rehabilitation with attention process training: A qualitative study. Neuropsychol Rehabil, 2020; 30(3):523–544.
89.
MartinC, FalconeRAJr. Pediatric traumatic brain injury: An update of research to understand and improve outcomes. Curr Opin Pediatr, 2008; 20(3):294–299.
90.
MaxJE, MathewsK, ManesFF, et al.Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and neurocognitive correlates after childhood stroke. J Int Neuropsychol Soc, 2003; 9(6):815–829.
91.
McAllisterTW, ArciniegasD. Evaluation and treatment of postconcussive symptoms. NeuroRehabilitation, 2002; 17(4):265–283.
92.
MeningherI, Bernstein-EliavM, RubovitchV, et al.Alterations in network connectivity after traumatic brain injury in mice. J Neurotrauma, 2020; 37(20):2169–2179.
93.
MeyerHC, BucciDJ. Neural and behavioral mechanisms of proactive and reactive inhibition. Learn Mem, 2016; 23(10):504–514.
94.
MoherD, ShamseerL, ClarkeM, et al.Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst Rev, 2015; 4(1):1.
95.
Moreno-LópezL, ManktelowAE, SahakianBJ, et al.Anything goes? Regulation of the neural processes underlying response inhibition in TBI patients. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol, 2017; 27(2):159–169; doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2016.12.002
96.
MoriS, Van ZijlPC. Fiber tracking: Principles and strategies—A technical review. NMR Biomed, 2002; 15(7-8):468–480.
97.
NicholsTE, DasS, EickhoffSB, et al.Best practices in data analysis and sharing in neuroimaging using MRI. Nat Neurosci, 2017; 20(3):299–303.
98.
NiogiSN, MukherjeeP, GhajarJ, et al.Structural dissociation of attentional control and memory in adults with and without mild traumatic brain injury. Brain, 2008; 131(12):3209–3221.
99.
NumssenO, BzdokD, HartwigsenG. Functional specialization within the inferior parietal lobes across cognitive domains. elife, 2021; 10:e63591.
100.
O'KeeffeF, LiégeoisF, EveM, et al.Neuropsychological and neurobehavioral outcome following childhood arterial ischemic stroke: Attention deficits, emotional dysregulation, and executive dysfunction. Child Neuropsychol, 2014; 20(5):557–582.
101.
OlsenA, BabikianT, BiglerED, et al.Toward a global and reproducible science for brain imaging in neurotrauma: The ENIGMA adult moderate/severe traumatic brain injury working group. Brain Imaging Behav, 2021; 15(2):526–554.
102.
OwnsworthT, HawkesA, StegingaS, et al.A biopsychosocial perspective on adjustment and quality of life following brain tumor: A systematic evaluation of the literature. Disabil Rehabil, 2009; 31(13):1038–1055.
103.
PearnML, NiesmanIR, EgawaJ, et al.Pathophysiology associated with traumatic brain injury: Current treatments and potential novel therapeutics. Cell Mol Neurobiol, 2017; 37:571–585.
104.
PirondiniE, KinanyN, Le SueurC, et al.Post-stroke reorganization of transient brain activity characterizes deficits and recovery of cognitive functions. Neuroimage, 2022; 255:119201.
105.
PtakR, SchniderA. The attention network of the human brain: Relating structural damage associated with spatial neglect to functional imaging correlates of spatial attention. Neuropsychologia, 2011; 49(11):3063–3070; doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.07.008
106.
PudenzRH, SheldenCH. The lucite calvarium—A method for direct observation of the brain: II. Cranial trauma and brain movement. J Neurosurg, 1946; 3(6):487–505.
107.
PuigJ, PedrazaS, BlascoG, et al.Acute damage to the posterior limb of the internal capsule on diffusion tensor tractography as an early imaging predictor of motor outcome after stroke. Am J Neuroradiol, 2011; 32(5):857–863.
108.
RaichleME. The brain's default mode network. Annu Rev Neurosci, 2015; 38:433–447.
109.
RaichleME, MacLeodAM, SnyderAZ, et al.A default mode of brain function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A, 2001; 98(2):676–682.
110.
RamseyLE, SiegelJS, BaldassarreA, et al.Normalization of network connectivity in hemispatial neglect recovery. Ann Neurol, 2016; 80(1):127–141.
111.
RenY, PanL, DuX, et al.Functional brain network mechanism of executive control dysfunction in temporal lobe epilepsy. BMC Neurol, 2020; 20(1):1–13.
112.
RosamondWD, FolsomAR, ChamblessLE, et al.Stroke incidence and survival among middle-aged adults: 9-year follow-up of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) cohort. Stroke, 1999; 30(4):736–743.
113.
SahuAK, AmrithanandV, MathewR, et al.COVID-19 in health care workers—A systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Emerg Med, 2020; 38(9):1727–1731.
114.
SarterM, GivensB, BrunoJP. The cognitive neuroscience of sustained attention: Where top-down meets bottom-up. Brain Res Rev, 2001; 35(2):146–160.
115.
SchacharR, LevinHS, MaxJE, et al.Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms and response inhibition after closed head injury in children: Do preinjury behavior and injury severity predict outcome?. Dev Neuropsychol, 2004; 25(1–2):179–198.
116.
SchacharR, LoganGD. Impulsivity and inhibitory control in normal development and childhood psychopathology. Dev Psychol, 1990; 26(5):710.
117.
SeeleyWW, MenonV, SchatzbergAF, et al.Dissociable intrinsic connectivity networks for salience processing and executive control. J Neurosci, 2007; 27(9):2349–2356.
118.
SharpDJ, BeckmannCF, GreenwoodR, et al.Default mode network functional and structural connectivity after traumatic brain injury. Brain, 2011; 134(Pt 8):2233–2247; doi: 10.1093/brain/awr175
ShermanLE, RudieJD, PfeiferJH, et al.Development of the default mode and central executive networks across early adolescence: A longitudinal study. Dev Cogn Neurosci, 2014; 10:148–159.
121.
ShiJ, TengJ, DuX, et al.Multi-modal analysis of resting-state fMRI data in mTBI patients and association with neuropsychological outcomes. Front Neurol, 2021; 12:639760; doi: 10.3389/fneur.2021.639760
122.
SiegelJS, SeitzmanBA, RamseyLE, et al.Re-emergence of modular brain networks in stroke recovery. Cortex, 2018; 101:44–59; doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.12.019
123.
SongX, PanychLP, ChenN-K. Data-driven and predefined ROI-based quantification of long-term resting-state fMRI reproducibility. Brain Connect, 2016; 6(2):136–151.
124.
SpornsO. Structure and function of complex brain networks. Dialogues Clin Neurosci, 2013; 15(3):247.
125.
SpornsO, BetzelRF. Modular brain networks. Annu Rev Psychol, 2016; 67:613–640.
126.
SteinerL, FederspielA, SlavovaN, et al.Cognitive outcome is related to functional thalamo-cortical connectivity after paediatric stroke. Brain Commun, 2022; 4(3):fcac110.
127.
StephensJA, SalorioCE, GomesJP, et al.Response inhibition deficits and altered motor network connectivity in the chronic phase of pediatric traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma, 2017; 34(22):3117–3123.
128.
StephensJA, SalorioCF, BarberAD, et al.Preliminary findings of altered functional connectivity of the default mode network linked to functional outcomes one year after pediatric traumatic brain injury. Dev Neurorehabil, 2018; 21(7):423–430; doi: 10.1080/17518423.2017.1338777
129.
StoneS, HalliganP, GreenwoodR. The incidence of neglect phenomena and related disorders in patients with an acute right or left hemisphere stroke. Age Ageing, 1993; 22(1):46–52.
130.
SuoX, DingH, LiX, et al.Anatomical and functional coupling between the dorsal and ventral attention networks. Neuroimage, 2021; 232:117868.
131.
SupekarK, CaiW, KrishnadasR, et al.Dysregulated brain dynamics in a triple-network saliency model of schizophrenia and its relation to psychosis. Biol Psychiatry, 2019; 85(1):60–69.
132.
TomasiD, VolkowND. Association between functional connectivity hubs and brain networks. Cereb Cortex, 2011; 21(9):2003–2013.
133.
Torres-SimónL, DovalS, NebredaA, et al.Understanding brain function in vascular cognitive impairment and dementia with EEG and MEG: A systematic review. Neuroimage Clin, 2022; 35:103040.
134.
TszeDS, ValenteJH. Pediatric stroke: A review. Emerg Med Int, 2011; 2011:734506.
135.
UmarovaRM, ReisertM, BeierTU, et al.Attention-network specific alterations of structural connectivity in the undamaged white matter in acute neglect. Hum Brain Mapp, 2014; 35(9):4678–4692; doi: 10.1002/hbm.22503
136.
Van Den HeuvelMP, SpornsO. Rich-club organization of the human connectome. J Neurosci, 2011; 31(44):15775–15786.
137.
Van DiessenE, NumanT, Van DellenE, et al.Opportunities and methodological challenges in EEG and MEG resting state functional brain network research. Clin Neurophysiol, 2015; 126(8):1468–1481.
138.
VedaeiF, NewbergAB, AlizadehM, et al.Resting-state functional MRI metrics in patients with chronic mild traumatic brain injury and their association with clinical cognitive performance. Front Hum Neurosci, 2021; 15:782.
139.
VeldsmanM, ChurilovL, WerdenE, et al.Physical activity after stroke is associated with increased interhemispheric connectivity of the dorsal attention network. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2017; 31(2):157–167; doi: 10.1177/1545968316666958
140.
VincentJL, KahnI, SnyderAZ, et al.Evidence for a frontoparietal control system revealed by intrinsic functional connectivity. J Neurophysiol, 2008; 100(6):3328–3342.
141.
WangJ, BakhadirovK, AbdiH, et al.Longitudinal changes of structural connectivity in traumatic axonal injury. Neurology, 2011; 77(9):818–826.
142.
WangY, WangC, WeiY, et al.Abnormal functional connectivities patterns of multidomain cognitive impairments in pontine stroke patients. Hum Brain Mapp, 2022; 43(15):4676–4688.
143.
WareAL, BiekmanB, HacheyR, et al.A preliminary high-definition fiber tracking study of the executive control network in blast-induced traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma, 2019; 36(5):686–701; doi: 10.1089/neu.2018.5725
144.
WeissmanDH, PradoJ. Heightened activity in a key region of the ventral attention network is linked to reduced activity in a key region of the dorsal attention network during unexpected shifts of covert visual spatial attention. Neuroimage, 2012; 61(4):798–804.
145.
WongJK, ChurchillNW, GrahamSJ, et al.Altered connectivity of default mode and executive control networks among female patients with persistent post-concussion symptoms. Brain Inj, 2023; 37(2):147–158.
146.
WuL, WangC, LiuJ, et al.Voxel-mirrored homotopic connectivity associated with change of cognitive function in chronic pontine stroke. Front Aging Neurosci, 2021; 13:621767; doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2021.621767
147.
WuZ, MazzolaCA, CataniaL, et al.Altered cortical activation and connectivity patterns for visual attention processing in young adults post-traumatic brain injury: A functional near infrared spectroscopy study. CNS Neurosci Ther, 2018; 24(6):539–548; doi: 10.1111/cns.12811
148.
XiaoH, YangY, XiJ-H, et al.Structural and functional connectivity in traumatic brain injury. Neural Regen Res, 2015; 10(12):2062.
149.
YuanW, Treble-BarnaA, SohlbergMM, et al.Changes in structural connectivity following a cognitive intervention in children with traumatic brain injury. Neurorehabil Neural Repair, 2017; 31(2):190–201; doi: 10.1177/1545968316675430
150.
ZaneKL, GfellerJD, RoskosPT, et al.Diffusion tensor imaging findings and neuropsychological performance in adults with TBI across the spectrum of severity in the chronic-phase. Brain Inj, 2021; 35(5):536–546; doi: 10.1080/02699052.2021.1887521
151.
ZorowitzR, GrossE, PolinskiD. The stroke survivor. Disabil Rehabil, 2002; 24(13):666–679.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
