ArticleCognitive neurodynamics2018
Examining stability of independent component analysis based on coefficient and component matrices for voxel-based morphometry of structural magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in Cognitive neurodynamics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Changes of brain function in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus measured by different analysis methods: A new coordinate-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging.Frontiers in neurology · 2022Pooled it
- Neuroimaging and natural language processing-based classification of suicidal thoughts in major depressive disorder.Translational psychiatry · 2024Article
- Dissociation Pattern in Default-Mode Network Homogeneity in Drug-Naive Bipolar Disorder.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2021Article
- Assessment of nonnegative matrix factorization algorithms for electroencephalography spectral analysis.Biomedical engineering online · 2020Article
- Snowball ICA: A Model Order Free Independent Component Analysis Strategy for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Independent component analysis (ICA) on group-level voxel-based morphometry (VBM) produces the coefficient matrix and the component matrix. The former contains variability among multiple subjects for further statistical analysis, and the latter reveals spatial maps common for all subjects. ICA algorithms converge to local optimization points in practice and the mostly applied stability investigation approach examines the stability of the extracted components. We found that the practically stable components do not guarantee to produce the practically stable coefficients of ICA decomposition for the further statistical analysis. Consequently, we proposed a novel approach including two steps: (1), the stability index for the coefficient matrix and the stability index for the component matrix were examined, respectively; (2) the two indices were multiplied to analyze the stability of ICA decomposition. The proposed approach was used to study the sMRI data of Type II diabetes mellitus group and the healthy control group (HC). Group differences in VBM were found in the superior temporal gyrus. Besides, it was revealed that the VBMs of the region of the HC group were significantly correlated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) describing the level of cognitive disorder. In contrast to the widely applied approach to investigating the stability of the extracted components for ICA decomposition, we proposed to examine the stability of ICA decomposition by fusion the stability of both coefficient matrix and the component matrix. Therefore, the proposed approach can examine the stability of ICA decomposition sufficiently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.