ArticleBiostatistics (Oxford, England)2025
Regression and alignment for functional data and network topology.
Article in Biostatistics (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Tell me why: A scoping review on the fundamental building blocks of fMRI-based network analysis.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In the brain, functional connections form a network whose topological organization can be described by graph-theoretic network diagnostics. These include characterizations of the community structure, such as modularity and participation coefficient, which have been shown to change over the course of childhood and adolescence. To investigate if such changes in the functional network are associated with changes in cognitive performance during development, network studies often rely on an arbitrary choice of preprocessing parameters, in particular the proportional threshold of network edges. Because the choice of parameter can impact the value of the network diagnostic, and therefore downstream conclusions, we propose to circumvent that choice by conceptualizing the network diagnostic as a function of the parameter. As opposed to a single value, a network diagnostic curve describes the connectome topology at multiple scales-from the sparsest group of the strongest edges to the entire edge set. To relate these curves to executive function and other covariates, we use scalar-on-function regression, which is more flexible than previous functional data-based models used in network neuroscience. We then consider how systematic differences between networks can manifest in misalignment of diagnostic curves, and consequently propose a supervised curve alignment method that incorporates auxiliary information from other variables. Our algorithm performs both functional regression and alignment via an iterative, penalized, and nonlinear likelihood optimization. The illustrated method has the potential to improve the interpretability and generalizability of neuroscience studies where the goal is to study heterogeneity among a mixture of function- and scalar-valued measures.
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.