ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2025
Tell me why: A scoping review on the fundamental building blocks of fMRI-based network analysis.
Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2025. 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.
- Multiscale network perspectives on glioma: from tumour biology to symptoms, survival and treatment.Nature reviews. Neurology · 2026Review
- Jointly estimating individual and group networks from fMRI data.Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding complex brain-behaviour relationships in psychiatric and neurological conditions is crucial for advancing clinical insights. This review explores the current landscape of network estimation methods in the context of functional MRI (fMRI) based network neuroscience, focusing on static undirected network analysis. We focused on papers published in a single year (2022) and characterised what we consider the fundamental building blocks of network analysis: sample size, network size, association type, edge inclusion strategy, edge weights, modelling level, and confounding factors. We found that the most common methods across all included studies (n = 191) were the use of pairwise correlations to estimate the associations between brain regions (79.6 %), estimation of weighted networks (95.3 %), and estimation of the network at the individual level (86.9 %). Importantly, a substantial number of studies lacked comprehensive reporting on their methodological choices, hindering the synthesis of research findings within the field. This review underscores the critical need for careful consideration and transparent reporting of fMRI network estimation methodologies to advance our understanding of complex brain-behaviour relationships. By facilitating the integration between network neuroscience and network psychometrics, we aim to significantly enhance our clinical understanding of these intricate connections.
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.