ArticleNeurophotonics2023
Revealing the spatiotemporal requirements for accurate subject identification with resting-state functional connectivity: a simultaneous fNIRS-fMRI study.
Article in Neurophotonics, 2023. 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.
- Trial
- Disrupted functional connectivity during stroke recovery revealed via bedside optical neuroimaging.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Prefrontal fNIRS hemodynamic correlates of attentional load during rapid serial visual presentation tasks.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- The functional near infrared spectroscopy applications in children with developmental diseases: a review.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Applications and advances of combined fMRI-fNIRs techniques in brain functional research.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Review
- Shedding light on the brain: guidelines to address inconsistent data collection parameters in resting-state NIRS studies.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2025Article
- Concurrent optoacoustic tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of resting-state functional connectivity in the mouse brain.Nature communications · 2024Article
- From lab to life: challenges and perspectives of fNIRS for haemodynamic-based neurofeedback in real-world environments.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2024Review
- Optimizing spatial specificity and signal quality in fNIRS: an overview of potential challenges and possible options for improving the reliability of real-time applications.Frontiers in neuroergonomics · 2024Review
- Special Section Guest Editorial: Thirty Years of Functional Near-Infrared Spectroscopy.Neurophotonics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Significance: Brain fingerprinting refers to identifying participants based on their functional patterns. Despite its success with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), brain fingerprinting with functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) still lacks adequate validation. Aim: We investigated how fNIRS-specific acquisition features (limited spatial information and nonneural contributions) influence resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) patterns at the intra-subject level and, therefore, brain fingerprinting. Approach: We performed multiple simultaneous fNIRS and fMRI measurements in 29 healthy participants at rest. Data were preprocessed following the best practices, including the removal of motion artifacts and global physiology. The rsFC maps were extracted with the Pearson correlation coefficient. Brain fingerprinting was tested with pairwise metrics and a simple linear classifier. Results: Our results show that average classification accuracy with fNIRS ranges from 75% to 98%, depending on the number of runs and brain regions used for classification. Under the right conditions, brain fingerprinting with fNIRS is close to the 99.9% accuracy found with fMRI. Overall, the classification accuracy is more impacted by the number of runs and the spatial coverage than the choice of the classification algorithm. Conclusions: This work provides evidence that brain fingerprinting with fNIRS is robust and reliable for extracting unique individual features at the intra-subject level once relevant spatiotemporal constraints are correctly employed.
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.