ArticleBrain sciences2024
The Use of Generative Adversarial Network and Graph Convolution Network for Neuroimaging-Based Diagnostic Classification.
Article in Brain sciences, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Classification of systemic lupus erythematosus resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data based on the end-to-end model].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2026Article
- Multi-Scale Structural MRI Features Reveal Task-Based Functional Connectivity and Its Alterations in Psychiatric Disorders: A Collaborative Graph Attention Network Approach.Brain topography · 2026Article
- Cross-attention-guided subject-adaptive graph learning for multimodal autism classification: integrating structural and functional MRI data.Brain informatics · 2026Article
- A Review of Data Engineering in United States Healthcare Infrastructure.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- The Deep Learning Revolution in Neuroimaging: Insights from a Bibliometric Analysis (2014-2024).Neuroinformatics · 2026Review
- Integrating multi-atlas neuroimaging data for robust biomarker identification in neuropsychiatric disorders.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Integrating generative adversarial networks with IoT for adaptive AI-powered personalized elderly care in smart homes.Frontiers in artificial intelligence · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Functional connectivity (FC) obtained from resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging has been integrated with machine learning algorithms to deliver consistent and reliable brain disease classification outcomes. However, in classical learning procedures, custom-built specialized feature selection techniques are typically used to filter out uninformative features from FC patterns to generalize efficiently on the datasets. The ability of convolutional neural networks (CNN) and other deep learning models to extract informative features from data with grid structure (such as images) has led to the surge in popularity of these techniques. However, the designs of many existing CNN models still fail to exploit the relationships between entities of graph-structure data (such as networks). Therefore, graph convolution network (GCN) has been suggested as a means for uncovering the intricate structure of brain network data, which has the potential to substantially improve classification accuracy. Furthermore, overfitting in classifiers can be largely attributed to the limited number of available training samples. Recently, the generative adversarial network (GAN) has been widely used in the medical field for its generative aspect that can generate synthesis images to cope with the problems of data scarcity and patient privacy. In our previous work, GCN and GAN have been designed to investigate FC patterns to perform diagnosis tasks, and their effectiveness has been tested on the ABIDE-I dataset. In this paper, the models will be further applied to FC data derived from more public datasets (ADHD, ABIDE-II, and ADNI) and our in-house dataset (PTSD) to justify their generalization on all types of data. The results of a number of experiments show the powerful characteristic of GAN to mimic FC data to achieve high performance in disease prediction. When employing GAN for data augmentation, the diagnostic accuracy across ADHD-200, ABIDE-II, and ADNI datasets surpasses that of other machine learning models, including results achieved with BrainNetCNN. Specifically, in ADHD, the accuracy increased from 67.74% to 73.96% with GAN, in ABIDE-II from 70.36% to 77.40%, and in ADNI, reaching 52.84% and 88.56% for multiclass and binary classification, respectively. GCN also obtains decent results, with the best accuracy in ADHD datasets at 71.38% for multinomial and 75% for binary classification, respectively, and the second-best accuracy in the ABIDE-II dataset (72.28% and 75.16%, respectively). Both GAN and GCN achieved the highest accuracy for the PTSD dataset, reaching 97.76%. However, there are still some limitations that can be improved. Both methods have many opportunities for the prediction and diagnosis of diseases.
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.