↓ Skip to main content

A Data-Driven Method to Reduce the Impact of Region Size on Degree Metrics in Voxel-Wise Functional Brain Networks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
24 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
A Data-Driven Method to Reduce the Impact of Region Size on Degree Metrics in Voxel-Wise Functional Brain Networks
Published in
Frontiers in Neurology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fneur.2014.00199
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cirong Liu, Xiaoguang Tian

Abstract

Degree, which is the number of connections incident upon a node, measures the relative importance of the node within a network. By computing degree metrics in voxel-wise functional brain networks, many studies performed high-resolution mapping of brain network hubs using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging. Despite its extensive applications, defining nodes as voxels without considering the different sizes of brain regions may result in a network where the degree cannot accurately represent the importance of nodes. In this study, we designed a data-driven method to reduce this impact of the region size in degree metrics by (1) disregarding all self-connections among voxels within the same region and (2) regulating connections from voxels of other regions by the sizes of those regions. The modified method that we proposed allowed direct evaluation of the impact of the region size, showing that traditional degree metrics overestimated the degree of previous identified hubs in humans, including the visual cortex, precuneus/posterior cingulate cortex, and posterior parietal cortex, and underestimated the degree of regions including the insular cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, parahippocampus, sensory and motor cortex, and supplementary motor area. However, the locations of prominent hubs were stable even after correcting the impact. These findings were robust under different connectivity thresholds, degree metrics, data-preprocessing procedures, and datasets. In addition, our modified method improved test-retest reliability of degree metrics as well as the sensitivity in group-statistic comparisons. As a promising new tool, our method may reveal network properties that better represent true brain architecture without compromising its data-driven advantage.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 4%
Unknown 23 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 25%
Researcher 6 25%
Student > Master 3 13%
Student > Postgraduate 2 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 3 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 17%
Engineering 4 17%
Neuroscience 3 13%
Psychology 2 8%
Other 5 21%
Unknown 1 4%
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 13 October 2014.
All research outputs
#18,380,628
of 22,766,595 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurology
#7,687
of 11,665 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,716
of 255,754 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurology
#51
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,766,595 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 11,665 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 255,754 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.