ArticleBrain informatics2026
Benchmarking resting state fMRI connectivity pipelines for classification: robust accuracy despite processing variability in cross-site eye state prediction.
Article in Brain informatics, 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.
- Human brain network for reading the mind from the eyes: beyond activated and deactivated regions.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2026Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The rapid evolution of machine learning (ML) methods has yielded promising results in human brain neuroscience. However, the reproducibility of ML applications in neuroimaging remains limited, challenging the generalizability of inferences to broader populations. In addition to the inherent variability of the brain activity (both in healthy and pathological states), poor reproducibility is further enhanced by inconsistencies in data preprocessing techniques and methods for calculating functional connectivity (FC), which are used as parameters for brain state classification. To systematically assess the impact of abovementioned factors on ML applications to fMRI data, we benchmarked a comprehensive set of FC analysis pipelines for the classification task between fMRI data recorded in two fundamentally different states: eyes open and eyes closed. In contrast to studies involving heterogeneous clinical populations or using complex cognitive tasks, our controlled experimental design - based on two independent datasets of healthy participants collected in different laboratories - minimizes variability related to a task design or pathological brain states. Classification accuracy and reproducibility were compared for 256 distinct FC analysis pipelines, covering common preprocessing approaches, brain parcellation schemes, and connectivity metrics. Notably, we employed two ways of validation: a direct cross-site validation strategy - when a model was trained on one site and tested on another, and few-shot domain adaptation - when a few samples of testing site were added to the train set. Despite the substantial variability in pipeline configurations, we observed consistently high classification accuracy (~ 90%), confirming that FC-based models can robustly discriminate between well-defined brain states (eye conditions) across different acquisition sites. Best results both in terms of classification accuracy and stability were observed using Pearson correlation and tangent space parametrization as FC, Brainnetome as atlas, and confound regression strategies based on the CompCor method. These findings highlight the resilience of rs-fMRI FC-derived characteristics to methodological variation and support their utility in the discovery of biomarkers, particularly in settings that involve stable and reproducible brain states.
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.