↓ Skip to main content

Characterizing Functional Connectivity Differences in Aging Adults using Machine Learning on Resting State fMRI Data

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
74 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
139 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Characterizing Functional Connectivity Differences in Aging Adults using Machine Learning on Resting State fMRI Data
Published in
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fncom.2013.00038
Pubmed ID
Authors

Svyatoslav Vergun, Alok S. Deshpande, Timothy B. Meier, Jie Song, Dana L. Tudorascu, Veena A. Nair, Vikas Singh, Bharat B. Biswal, M. Elizabeth Meyerand, Rasmus M. Birn, Vivek Prabhakaran

Abstract

The brain at rest consists of spatially distributed but functionally connected regions, called intrinsic connectivity networks (ICNs). Resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) has emerged as a way to characterize brain networks without confounds associated with task fMRI such as task difficulty and performance. Here we applied a Support Vector Machine (SVM) linear classifier as well as a support vector machine regressor to rs-fMRI data in order to compare age-related differences in four of the major functional brain networks: the default, cingulo-opercular, fronto-parietal, and sensorimotor. A linear SVM classifier discriminated between young and old subjects with 84% accuracy (p-value < 1 × 10(-7)). A linear SVR age predictor performed reasonably well in continuous age prediction (R (2) = 0.419, p-value < 1 × 10(-8)). These findings reveal that differences in intrinsic connectivity as measured with rs-fMRI exist between subjects, and that SVM methods are capable of detecting and utilizing these differences for classification and prediction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 139 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 3%
Finland 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Singapore 1 <1%
China 1 <1%
Poland 1 <1%
Unknown 129 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 38 27%
Researcher 22 16%
Student > Master 20 14%
Professor > Associate Professor 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 8 6%
Other 19 14%
Unknown 22 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 30 22%
Neuroscience 28 20%
Engineering 12 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 7%
Computer Science 8 6%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 24 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 September 2013.
All research outputs
#18,347,414
of 22,721,584 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#1,050
of 1,336 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#218,056
of 280,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
#92
of 131 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,721,584 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,336 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,759 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 131 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.