ArticleEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging2026
Comparative evaluation of graph construction methods for individual brain metabolic network from FDG-PET images: an ADNI study in healthy subjects.
Article in European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Personalized metabolic connectome analysis reveals glucose heterogeneity in ischemic cerebrovascular disease.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026Article
- [Brain structure & function · 2026Article
- Comparing three methodologies for network analysis of human [EJNMMI research · 2025Article
- Metabolic connectivity alterations in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: Individual network analysis based on Wasserstein distances.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeConnectivity analyses of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) static images provide a valuable means of investigating brain network organization by capturing metabolic activity at rest. Graph theory is emergently applied to model these networks at individual level; however, the choice of graph construction method can significantly impact analytical outcomes.
methodsIn this study, we systematically evaluate and compare methods for building individual graphs from FDG-PET images in healthy control subjects. Specifically, we assess five methods, categorized into mean-based graphs and probability density function (PDF)-based graphs, using two criteria: structural similarity between individual and group-level graphs, and their hub topology structure analysis.
resultsOur findings indicate that the Effect Size-based (ES) method best preserves group-level graph structure, achieving 98.9% similarity for the averaged graph while also maintaining around 84% similarity for individual graphs. Among PDF-based approaches, the Wasserstein (WA) method, with its adaptability in PDF-based settings, provides the highest similarity across both averaged (82.5%) and individual (79.1%) graphs, with its adaptive in PDF-settings, making it the most effective for multi-scale network analysis. Meanwhile, Dynamic Time Warping (DTW) captures the highest individual variability, as reflected by its largest variation among individual graphs (11.5%).
conclusionThis analysis highlights the unique strengths and limitations of each method, emphasizing the critical importance of careful method selection tailored to specific research objectives. Additionally, our study suggests a framework for selecting the appropriate methods, with implications for further both research and clinical applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40773019What 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.