ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2021
Use of random matrix theory in the discovery of resting state brain networks.
Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Eigenvalue Signatures Reveal Residual Motion Effects Across Resting-State fMRI Denoising Strategies.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Connectomics identifies brain networks in vivo in resting state functional MRI. However, the presence of noise produces spurious identification of brain networks, which have low test-retest reliability. A Network Based Statistics approach to network identification has been previously proposed that affords much better statistical power relative to Bonferroni method but nevertheless provides a sufficiently conservative, family-wise control for false positives. We propose the use of Random Matrix Theory (RMT) to discover brain networks and to associate those networks with demographic and clinical variables. We parcellated the brain into cortical and subcortical regions using either an anatomical or a functional brain atlas. We applied RMT to study functional connectivity across brain regions by first computing the correlation matrix for time courses in those brain regions and then identifying eigenvalues that deviate from the theoretical random distribution that RMT predicts, on the assumption that real brain networks would produce eigenvalues that differ significantly from the random distribution. We assessed the specificity and test-retest reliability of identified networks through application of this RMT-based approach to (1) synthetic data generated under the null-hypothesis, (2) resting state functional MRI data from 4 real-world cohorts of patients and healthy controls, and (3) synthetic data generated by the addition of increasing amounts of noise to real-world datasets. Our findings showed that RMT method was robust to the atlas used for parcellating the brain and did not discover a brain network in synthetic data when in fact a network was not present (i.e., specificity was high); RMT-identified networks in the real-world dataset had high test-retest reliability; and RMT-based method consistently discovered the same network in the presence of increasing noise in the real-world dataset.
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.