ArticleNetwork neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)2026
An evaluation of the efficacy of single-echo and multi-echo fMRI denoising strategies.
Article in Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Precision neurodiversity: personalized brain network architecture as a window into cognitive variability.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) is widely used to study brain-wide functional connectivity (FC). However, the resulting signals are highly noise sensitive, and the best strategies for mitigating this noise remains unclear. In 358 healthy individuals, we compared 60 multi-echo (ME) and 30 single-echo (SE) rsfMRI preprocessing pipelines across six measures of data quality and associated effect sizes in FC-based prediction models of personality and cognition (cross-validated kernel ridge regression). ME pipelines generally outperformed SE pipelines, but no single pipeline excelled at both denoising and behavioral prediction. Using a heuristic scheme to rank pipelines across benchmarks, ME optimum combination (OC) with ME independent component analysis (ICA), ICA-FMRIB's ICA-based Xnoiseifier (FIX), and with head motion, cerebrospinal fluid, and white matter and gray matter signal regression, performed best when only considering denoising efficacy metrics. ME OC with ICA-FIX and head motion parameter regression performed best when only considering behavioral prediction results. ME OC with Automatic Removal of Motion Artifacts (AROMA) ICA, head motion parameter regression and Regressor Interpolation at Progressive Time Delays (RIPTiDe) performed best when aggregating across all evaluation metrics. These results favor ME acquisitions but show that no single denoising pipeline should be considered optimal for all purposes.
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.