Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41734411›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2026

Evaluating structural connectivity disruption after stroke: individual tractography or the use of a model-based approach?

Franziska E Hildesheim, Keith W Jamison, Ilana R Leppert, Anna Zumbansen, Anja Ophey, Thomas Funck, Amy Kuceyeski, Alexander Thiel, NORTHSTAR Study Group and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Franziska E HildesheimLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Montréal, QC, Canada; Department of Neurology & Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada; Canadian Platform for Trials in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (CanStim), Montréal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: franziska.hildesheim@mail.mcgill.ca.
Keith W JamisonDepartment of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA; Department of Computational Biology, Weill Cornell College, Ithaca, NY, USA. Electronic address: kwj2001@med.cornell.edu.
Ilana R LeppertMcConnell Brain Imaging Centre, Montréal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: ilana.leppert@mcgill.ca.
Anna ZumbansenSchool of Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; Music and Health Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. Electronic address: azumbans@uottawa.ca.
Anja OpheyMedical Psychology, Neuropsychology and Gender Studies, Center for Neuropsychological Diagnostics and Intervention, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: anja.ophey@uk-koeln.de.
Thomas FunckChild Mind Institute, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: t.funck@fz-juelich.de.
Amy KuceyeskiDepartment of Radiology, Weill Cornell Medicine, New York, NY, USA; Department of Computational Biology, Weill Cornell College, Ithaca, NY, USA. Electronic address: amk2012@med.cornell.edu.
Alexander ThielLady Davis Institute for Medical Research, Montréal, QC, Canada; Department of Neurology & Neurosurgery, McGill University, Montréal, QC, Canada; Canadian Platform for Trials in Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (CanStim), Montréal, QC, Canada. Electronic address: alexander.thiel@mcgill.ca.
NORTHSTAR Study Group and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIschemic stroke disrupts structural connectivity between grey matter regions, influencing functional outcomes. Diffusion MRI-based tractography allows assessment of white matter damage and may guide rehabilitation. It remains unclear how structural connectivity disruption (SCD) estimated from individual tractography compares with model-based estimates using normative tractograms.

methodsDiffusion MRI data were analyzed from 23 individuals with subacute ischemic stroke and 60 healthy adults from two age-specific cohorts (Human Connectome Project/HCP, Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative/ADNI3). In Experiment 1, SCD estimates from individual tractography were compared to scores from the model-based Network Modification (NeMo) tool in the stroke cohort. In Experiment 2, synthetic middle cerebral artery lesions were applied to healthy adults' diffusion data to compare SCD estimates from tractography on synthetically lesioned versus complete data, to SCD estimates from the model-based NeMo tool. Rank-based linear mixed-effects models compared differences across approaches, cohorts, and 13 regions of interest (ROIs).

resultsIn stroke, SCD scores from individual tractography and NeMo were strongly correlated (R

conclusionBoth individual tractography and the model-based framework capture regional SCD patterns, with larger differences in older adults. The model-based framework is efficient for large-scale studies, while individual tractography may better capture patient- and age-specific SCD.

Indexed as

BrainDiffusion Tensor ImagingIschemic StrokeNerve NetStrokeWhite MatterAdultAgedAged, 80 and overConnectomeDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeural PathwaysDiffusion-weighted imagingStrokeStructural connectivityTractographyWhite matter

Identifiers

PMID41734411
PMCPMC13080591

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.