Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJunges, L
dc.contributor.authorLopes, MA
dc.contributor.authorTerry, JR
dc.contributor.authorGoodfellow, M
dc.date.accessioned2019-06-13T10:02:15Z
dc.date.issued2019-05-14
dc.description.abstractMathematical modelling has been widely used to predict the effects of perturbations to brain networks. An important example is epilepsy surgery, where the perturbation in question is the removal of brain tissue in order to render the patient free of seizures. Different dynamical models have been proposed to represent transitions to ictal states in this context. However, our choice of which mathematical model to use to address this question relies on making assumptions regarding the mechanism that defines the transition from background to the seizure state. Since these mechanisms are unknown, it is important to understand how predictions from alternative dynamical descriptions compare. Herein we evaluate to what extent three different dynamical models provide consistent predictions for the effect of removing nodes from networks. We show that for small, directed, connected networks the three considered models provide consistent predictions. For larger networks, predictions are shown to be less consistent. However consistency is higher in networks that have sufficiently large differences in ictogenicity between nodes. We further demonstrate that heterogeneity in ictogenicity across nodes correlates with variability in the number of connections for each node.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipMedical Research Council (MRC)en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEpilepsy Research UKen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipWellcome Trusten_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 9, article 7351en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1038/s41598-019-43871-7
dc.identifier.grantnumberEP/N014391/1en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberMR/K013998/1en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberP1505en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberWT105618MAen_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberEP/P021417/1en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/37508
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherNature Researchen_GB
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2019. Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.en_GB
dc.titleThe role that choice of model plays in predictions for epilepsy surgeryen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2019-06-13T10:02:15Z
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available on open access from Nature Research via the DOI in this recorden_GB
dc.identifier.eissn2045-2322
dc.identifier.journalScientific Reportsen_GB
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2019-05-02
exeter.funder::Medical Research Council (MRC)en_GB
exeter.funder::Wellcome Trusten_GB
exeter.funder::Epilepsy Research UKen_GB
exeter.funder::Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC)en_GB
exeter.funder::Wellcome Trusten_GB
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2019-12-01
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2019-06-13T09:58:20Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2019-06-13T10:02:32Z
refterms.panelBen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© The Author(s) 2019. Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © The Author(s) 2019. Open Access. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.