ArticleArXiv2024
Evaluation of Mean Shift, ComBat, and CycleGAN for Harmonizing Brain Connectivity Matrices Across Sites.
Article in ArXiv, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Connectivity matrices derived from diffusion MRI (dMRI) provide an interpretable and generalizable way of understanding the human brain connectome. However, dMRI suffers from inter-site and between-scanner variation, which impedes analysis across datasets to improve robustness and reproducibility of results. To evaluate different harmonization approaches on connectivity matrices, we compared graph measures derived from these matrices before and after applying three harmonization techniques: mean shift, ComBat, and CycleGAN. The sample comprises 168 age-matched, sex-matched normal subjects from two studies: the Vanderbilt Memory and Aging Project (VMAP) and the Biomarkers of Cognitive Decline Among Normal Individuals (BIOCARD). First, we plotted the graph measures and used coefficient of variation (CoV) and the Mann-Whitney U test to evaluate different methods' effectiveness in removing site effects on the matrices and the derived graph measures. ComBat effectively eliminated site effects for global efficiency and modularity and outperformed the other two methods. However, all methods exhibited poor performance when harmonizing average betweenness centrality. Second, we tested whether our harmonization methods preserved correlations between age and graph measures. All methods except for CycleGAN in one direction improved correlations between age and global efficiency and between age and modularity from insignificant to significant with p-values less than 0.05.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38344221PMC10854272What 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.