Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Demographic information.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Injury severity, mechanism of injury and brain imaging findings for all TBI subjects.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Neuropsychological performance of TBI group.

Mean (sd) raw score.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 1.

Modified digit symbol modalities task.

A. Level 1 or 2 of task as it appears in the scanner. Level 1 the symbol-digit pairing remains the same. Level 2, the symbol-digit pairing varies. B: Level 3 of the task where symbol-digit pairing in the key code is not in numerical order.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Table 4.

Motion detection summary.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Table 5.

FreeSurfer analysis: Mean (sd) volume ratio.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Fig 2.

Data processing pipeline for functional data.

Abbreviations: ICA: independent components analysis, dFC: dynamic functional connectivity,T1: structural MRI, MNI: montreal neurological institute, FWHM: full width half-maximum.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Components from spatially constrained ICA.

Illustrates the results of ICA resulting in 44 viable components. Panels A-H reveal the spatial extent of components comprising distinct subnetworks. Panel I shows the dynamic range and low to high frequency ratio used to determine the inclusion of components for the study.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 6.

Global graph metrics for static analysis.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Table 7.

Dynamic connectivity network states.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 4.

Test-retest reliability across runs for state frequency and transitions for both samples.

Panels A-C: show the test-retest reliability for the frequency data for states 3, 5, and 6. For both samples, the frequency for a state during run 1 was highly predictive of the frequency for that state in run 2. Panel D: provides test-retest reliability for the number of transitions between run 1 and run 2. Transitions in run1 predict transitions in run 2 only for the TBI sample.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Examining the influence of the number of states (k) on state transitions between groups.

The TBI sample reliably shows reduced transitions irrespective of investigator decisions regarding k. Error bars indicate standard error. * = between group difference significant, p<0.1, ** = between group difference significant, p<0.05.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Adjacency matrices for network states 1, 2, and 4.

Adjacency matrices for states 1, 2, and 4 which appeared only in the TBI sample. Abbreviations: Aud: auditory network, ECN: executive control network, DMN: default mode network, SM: sensory-motor network, SN: salience network.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Adjacency matrix and connectogram highlighting the connectivities across subnetworks for state 3.

Abbreviations: Aud: auditory network, ECN: executive control network, DMN: default mode network, SM: sensory-motor network, SN: salience network.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Fig 8.

Adjacency matrix and connectogram highlighting the connectivities across subnetworks for state 5.

Abbreviations: Aud: auditory network, ECN: executive control network, DMN: default mode network, SM: sensory-motor network, SN: salience network.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Fig 9.

Adjacency matrix and connectogram highlighting the connectivities across subnetworks for state 6.

Abbreviations: Aud: auditory network, ECN: executive control network, DMN: default mode network, SM: sensory-motor network, SN: salience network.

More »

Fig 9 Expand

Fig 10.

Cost probability distributions and hubs for state 3 for both samples.

Left: Cost probability distributions for state 3. Distributions based upon the cost for all nodes collapsed across runs for each group. Right: Hubs identified for each of the samples for state 3.

More »

Fig 10 Expand

Fig 11.

Cost probability distributions and hubs for state 3 for both samples.

Left: Cost probability distributions for state 5. Distributions based upon the cost for all nodes collapsed across runs for each group. Right: Hubs identified for each of the samples for state 5.

More »

Fig 11 Expand

Fig 12.

Cost probability distributions and hubs for state 3 for both samples.

Left: Cost probability distributions for state 6. Distributions based upon the cost for all notes collapsed across runs for each group. Right: Hubs identified for each of the samples for state 6.

More »

Fig 12 Expand

Table 8.

Correlation between state 5 hubs and state 5 frequency in TBI.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Table 9.

Correlation between state 5 hubs cognition in TBI.

More »

Table 9 Expand

Table 10.

Examining network dynamics (transitions) after TBI.

More »

Table 10 Expand