ArticlePloS one2022
A Weighted and Normalized Gould-Fernandez brokerage measure.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Exploring weighted network backbone extraction: A comparative analysis of structural techniques.PloS one · 2025Article
- An evaluation tool for backbone extraction techniques in weighted complex networks.Scientific reports · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The Gould and Fernandez local brokerage measure defines brokering roles based on the group membership of the nodes from the incoming and outgoing edges. This paper extends on this brokerage measure to account for weighted edges and introduces the Weighted-Normalized Gould-Fernandez measure (WNGF). The value added of this new measure is demonstrated empirically with both a macro level trade network and a micro level organization network. The measure is first applied to the EUREGIO inter-regional trade dataset and then to an organizational network in a research and development (R&D) group. The results gained from the WNGF measure are compared to those from two dichotomized networks: a threshold and a multiscale backbone network. The results show that the WNGF generates valid results, consistent with those of the dichotomized network. In addition, it provides the following advantages: (i) it ensures information retention; (ii) since no alterations and decisions have to be made on how to dichotomize the network, the WNGF frees the user from the burden of making assumptions; (iii) it provides a nuanced understanding of each node's brokerage role. These advantages are of special importance when the role of less connected nodes is considered. The two empirical networks used here are for illustrative purposes. Possible applications of WNGF span beyond regional and organizational studies, and into all those contexts where retaining weights is important, for example by accounting for persisting or repeating edges compared to one-time interactions. WNGF can also be used to further analyze networks that measure how often people meet, talk, text, like, or retweet. WNGF makes a relevant methodological contribution as it offers a way to analyze brokerage in weighted, directed, and even complete graphs without information loss that can be used across disciplines and different type of networks.
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.