ArticleFrontiers in aging neuroscience2020
Estimating Brain Functional Networks Based on Adaptively-Weighted fMRI Signals for MCI Identification.
Article in Frontiers in aging neuroscience, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A group based network analysis for Alzheimer's disease fMRI data.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Fusing Multiview Functional Brain Networks by Joint Embedding for Brain Disease Identification.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Accurate module induced brain network construction for mild cognitive impairment identification with functional MRI.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2023Article
- Brain Function Network: Higher Order vs. More Discrimination.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2021Article
- Multi-Scale Graph Representation Learning for Autism Identification With Functional MRI.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Brain functional network (BFN) analysis is becoming a crucial way to explore the inherent organized pattern of the brain and reveal potential biomarkers for diagnosing neurological or psychological disorders. In so doing, a well-estimated BFN is of great concern. In practice, however, noises or artifacts involved in the observed data (i.e., fMRI time series in this paper) generally lead to a poor estimation of BFN, and thus a complex preprocessing pipeline is often used to improve the quality of the data prior to BFN estimation. One of the popular preprocessing steps is data-scrubbing that aims at removing "bad" volumes from the fMRI time series according to the amplitude of the head motion. Despite its helpfulness in general, this traditional scrubbing scheme cannot guarantee that the removed volumes are necessarily unhelpful, since such a step is fully independent to the subsequent BFN estimation task. Moreover, the removal of volumes would reduce the statistical power, and different numbers of volumes are generally scrubbed for different subjects, resulting in an inconsistency or bias in the estimated BFNs. To address these issues, we develop a new learning framework that conducts BFN estimation and data-scrubbing simultaneously by an alternating optimization algorithm. The newly developed algorithm adaptively weights volumes (instead of removing them directly) for the task of BFN estimation. As a result, the proposed method can not only reduce the difficulty of threshold selection involved in the traditional scrubbing scheme, but also provide a more flexible framework that scrubs the data in the subsequent FBN estimation model. Finally, we validate the proposed method by identifying subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from normal controls based on the estimated BFNs, achieving an 80.22% classification accuracy, which significantly improves the baseline methods.
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.