Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34073098›Full record

ArticleBrain sciences2021

Statistical and Machine Learning Link Selection Methods for Brain Functional Networks: Review and Comparison.

Ilinka Ivanoska, Kire Trivodaliev, Slobodan Kalajdziski, Massimiliano Zanin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain sciences, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

4 authors.

Ilinka IvanoskaFaculty of Computer Science and Engineering, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia.ORCID 0000-0002-9363-1527
Kire TrivodalievFaculty of Computer Science and Engineering, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia.ORCID 0000-0002-7350-9583
Slobodan KalajdziskiFaculty of Computer Science and Engineering, Ss. Cyril and Methodius University, 1000 Skopje, North Macedonia.ORCID 0000-0003-3373-8637
Massimiliano ZaninInstituto de Física Interdisciplinar y Sistemas Complejos (CSIC-UIB), Campus Universitat de les Illes Balears, E-07122 Palma de Mallorca, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-5839-0393

Funding

Agencia Estatal de Investigación MDM-2017-0711European Cooperation in Science and Technology CA15120European Research Council 851255
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Network-based representations have introduced a revolution in neuroscience, expanding the understanding of the brain from the activity of individual regions to the interactions between them. This augmented network view comes at the cost of high dimensionality, which hinders both our capacity of deciphering the main mechanisms behind pathologies, and the significance of any statistical and/or machine learning task used in processing this data. A link selection method, allowing to remove irrelevant connections in a given scenario, is an obvious solution that provides improved utilization of these network representations. In this contribution we review a large set of statistical and machine learning link selection methods and evaluate them on real brain functional networks. Results indicate that most methods perform in a qualitatively similar way, with NBS (Network Based Statistics) winning in terms of quantity of retained information, AnovaNet in terms of stability and ExT (Extra Trees) in terms of lower computational cost. While machine learning methods are conceptually more complex than statistical ones, they do not yield a clear advantage. At the same time, the high heterogeneity in the set of links retained by each method suggests that they are offering complementary views to the data. The implications of these results in neuroscience tasks are finally discussed.

Indexed as

brain functional networkslink selectionmachine learningstatistics

Identifiers

PMID34073098
PMCPMC8227272

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.