ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2026
Analytic Bounds on GAMLSS Model Variability of Normative White Matter Brain Charts.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
39 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Brain charts, or normative models of quantitative neuroimaging measures, can identify trajectories of brain development and abnormalities in groups and individuals by leveraging large populations. Recent work has extended these brain charts to model microstructural and macrostructural features of white matter. Assessments of variance for these brain charts are necessary to determine whether the models being used for these data are stable. We implement an analytic approach to characterize variability of the parameters in previously released brain charts created using the generalized additive models for location, scale, and shape (GAMLSS) framework. Additionally, we empirically validate the accuracy of each analytic model through a comparison to a bootstrapping approach from 0.2 to 90 years of age. We find that across all models, the analytic coefficient of variation (COV) remains below 5% for ages greater than 0.25 years, with the maximum empirical observed COV reaching 7% at 0.2 years of age. Further, the empirical assessment shows high agreement with the analytic assessment, with COV estimates averaged across the lifespan for all models having a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.776 and a mean difference of 4 × 10
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.