Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32614515›Full record

ArticleBrain and behavior2020

Reproducibility of graph measures at the subject level using resting-state fMRI.

Qian Ran, Tarik Jamoulle, Jolien Schaeverbeke, Karen Meersmans, Rik Vandenberghe, Patrick Dupont

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain and behavior, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. INDIVIDUALIZED TRAJECTORY PREDICTION OF EARLY DEVELOPING FUNCTIONAL CONNECTIVITY.Proceedings. IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Longitudinal Infant Functional Connectivity Prediction via Conditional Intensive Triplet Network.Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention : MICCAI ... International Conference on Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention · 2022
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Qian RanLaboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Tarik JamoulleLaboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jolien SchaeverbekeLaboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Karen MeersmansLaboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Rik VandenbergheLaboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Patrick DupontLaboratory for Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurosciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0003-1980-2540

Funding

China Scholarship Council 201707610001Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 12Y1620NFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek G094418NOnderzoeksraad, KU Leuven C14/17/108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGraph metrics have been proposed as potential biomarkers for diagnosis in clinical work. However, before it can be applied in a clinical setting, their reproducibility should be evaluated.

methodsThis study systematically investigated the effect of two denoising pipelines and different whole-brain network constructions on reproducibility of subject-specific graph measures. We used the multi-session fMRI dataset from the Brain Genomics Superstruct Project consisting of 69 healthy young adults.

resultsIn binary networks, the test-retest variability for global measures was large at low density irrespective of the denoising strategy or the type of correlation. Weighted networks showed very low test-retest values (and thus a good reproducibility) for global graph measures irrespective of the strategy used. Comparing the test-retest values for different strategies, there were significant main effects of the type of correlation (Pearson correlation vs. partial correlation), the (partial) correlation value (absolute vs. positive vs. negative), and weight calculation (based on the raw (partial) correlation values vs. based on transformed Z-values). There was also a significant interaction effect between type of correlation and weight calculation. Similarly as for the binary networks, there was no main effect of the denoising pipeline.

conclusionOur results demonstrated that normalized global graph measures based on a weighted network using the absolute (partial) correlation as weight were reproducible. The denoising pipeline and the granularity of the whole-brain parcellation used to define the nodes were not critical for the reproducibility of normalized graph measures.

Indexed as

BrainMagnetic Resonance ImagingBrain MappingHumansReproducibility of ResultsYoung Adultdenoisinggraph measuresnetwork constructionreproducibilityresting-state fMRItest-retest variability

Identifiers

PMID32614515
PMCPMC7428495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.