4.7 Article

Magnetoencephalography resting-state correlates of executive and language components of verbal fluency

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 12, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-03829-0

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the specificity of the resting state MEG correlates of the executive and language components in verbal fluency were investigated. The results showed that slow clusters in the right hemisphere, including premotor, pre-central, and post-central cortex, were associated with executive monitoring, while slow parietal clusters and a cluster in the left inferior frontal gyrus were likely involved in phonological processing related to verbal fluency.
Verbal fluency (VF) is a heterogeneous cognitive function that requires executive as well as language abilities. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the specificity of the resting state MEG correlates of the executive and language components. To this end, we administered a VF test, another verbal test (Vocabulary), and another executive test (Trail Making Test), and we recorded 5-min eyes-open resting-state MEG data in 28 healthy participants. We used source-reconstructed spectral power estimates to compute correlation/anticorrelation MEG clusters with the performance at each test, as well as with the advantage in performance between tests, across individuals using cluster-level statistics in the standard frequency bands. By obtaining conjunction clusters between verbal fluency scores and factor loading obtained for verbal fluency and each of the two other tests, we showed a core of slow clusters (delta to beta) localized in the right hemisphere, in adjacent parts of the premotor, pre-central and post-central cortex in the mid-lateral regions related to executive monitoring. We also found slow parietal clusters bilaterally and a cluster in the gamma 2 and 3 bands in the left inferior frontal gyrus likely associated with phonological processing involved in verbal fluency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据