ArticleFrontiers in neural circuits2022
Comparison of Resting-State Functional MRI Methods for Characterizing Brain Dynamics.
Article in Frontiers in neural circuits, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sharp and smooth state transitions during resting state brain dynamics.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Resting-state fMRI analysis of functional connectivity and temporal dynamics differences between cocaine users and healthy controls.Neuroimage. Reports · 2026Article
- Fidelity of Spatiotemporal Patterns of Brain Activity Across Sampling Rate, Scan Duration, and Frequency Content.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Spatiotemporal Network Dynamics Reveal Alzheimer's Disease Progression.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- QPPLab: A generally applicable software package for detecting, analyzing, and visualizing large-scale quasiperiodic spatiotemporal patterns (QPPs) of brain activity.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- On null models for temporal small-worldness in brain dynamics.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Early altered directionality of resting brain network state transitions in the TgF344-AD rat model of Alzheimer's disease.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
- Spatial and Spectral Components of the BOLD Global Signal in Rat Resting-State Functional MRI.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2023Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Resting-state functional MRI (fMRI) exhibits time-varying patterns of functional connectivity. Several different analysis approaches have been developed for examining these resting-state dynamics including sliding window connectivity (SWC), phase synchrony (PS), co-activation pattern (CAP), and quasi-periodic patterns (QPP). Each of these approaches can be used to generate patterns of activity or inter-areal coordination which vary across time. The individual frames can then be clustered to produce temporal groupings commonly referred to as "brain states." Several recent publications have investigated brain state alterations in clinical populations, typically using a single method for quantifying frame-wise functional connectivity. This study directly compares the results of k-means clustering in conjunction with three of these resting-state dynamics methods (SWC, CAP, and PS) and quantifies the brain state dynamics across several metrics using high resolution data from the human connectome project. Additionally, these three dynamics methods are compared by examining how the brain state characterizations vary during the repeated sequences of brain states identified by a fourth dynamic analysis method, QPP. The results indicate that the SWC, PS, and CAP methods differ in the clusters and trajectories they produce. A clear illustration of these differences is given by how each one results in a very different clustering profile for the 24s sequences explicitly identified by the QPP algorithm. PS clustering is sensitive to QPPs with the mid-point of most QPP sequences grouped into the same single cluster. CAPs are also highly sensitive to QPPs, separating each phase of the QPP sequences into different sets of clusters. SWC (60s window) is less sensitive to QPPs. While the QPPs are slightly more likely to occur during specific SWC clusters, the SWC clustering does not vary during the 24s QPP sequences, the goal of this work is to improve both the practical and theoretical understanding of different resting-state dynamics methods, thereby enabling investigators to better conceptualize and implement these tools for characterizing functional brain networks.
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.