ArticleNeuroimage. Reports2023
An examination of the reliability of seed-to-seed resting state functional connectivity in tinnitus patients.
Article in Neuroimage. Reports, 2023. 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.
- A large-scale, multi-site examination of resting state functional connectivity in tinnitus.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Review and Perspective on Brain Bases of Tinnitus.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Resting state functional connectivity (RS-FC) studies of tinnitus over the years have produced inconsistent results. While findings can be organized into broad categories, such as increased correlations between auditory and limbic areas in tinnitus patients and a disrupted default mode network, there has been little one-to-one correspondence of results across RS-FC studies of tinnitus. While some of this variation can be explained by the heterogeneity of the tinnitus population, including tinnitus severity, the sources of variability in RS-FC of tinnitus patients are unclear. To directly assess the reliability of RS-FC measures in tinnitus, both tinnitus and control participants from two different sites (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, or UIUC, and the Wilford Hall Ambulatory Surgical Center, or WHASC, at the Lackland Airforce Base in San Antonio, Texas) participated in two resting state MRI scans separated by exactly one week. Seed-to-seed analysis assessing correlations between the fMRI activity of 27 regions in the default mode, dorsal attention, auditory, visual, salience, and emotional processing networks were examined in control and tinnitus participants separately for each site. Additionally, heart rate and respiration measures were collected at UIUC, and the effect of extra physiological corrections using these measures on reliability was examined within the UIUC participants. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used as the measure of reliability. Overall, RS-FC in a seed-to-seed analysis was as reliable in tinnitus participants as it was in control participants in the seed regions examined. As previously shown in studies of participants with normal hearing sensitivity, intra-network reliability was higher than inter-network reliability. Related to this, stronger correlations between two seed regions were predictive of stronger reliability of the connectivity between those regions. These effects were seen in both control and tinnitus populations. Additional physiological corrections did not have a significant impact on the ICC values. The current study demonstrates that, on a whole-brain level, RS-FC assessed via seed-to-seed analysis is reliable in tinnitus participants. We therefore must look to other sources as potential causes of discrepancies across studies, such as variability within analysis techniques or within the behavioral characteristics of tinnitus participants.
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.