↓ Skip to main content

A Novel Group-Fused Sparse Partial Correlation Method for Simultaneous Estimation of Functional Networks in Group Comparison Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Topography, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
5 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
12 Mendeley
Title
A Novel Group-Fused Sparse Partial Correlation Method for Simultaneous Estimation of Functional Networks in Group Comparison Studies
Published in
Brain Topography, December 2017
DOI 10.1007/s10548-017-0615-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoyun Liang, David N. Vaughan, Alan Connelly, Fernando Calamante

Abstract

The conventional way to estimate functional networks is primarily based on Pearson correlation along with classic Fisher Z test. In general, networks are usually calculated at the individual-level and subsequently aggregated to obtain group-level networks. However, such estimated networks are inevitably affected by the inherent large inter-subject variability. A joint graphical model with Stability Selection (JGMSS) method was recently shown to effectively reduce inter-subject variability, mainly caused by confounding variations, by simultaneously estimating individual-level networks from a group. However, its benefits might be compromised when two groups are being compared, given that JGMSS is blinded to other groups when it is applied to estimate networks from a given group. We propose a novel method for robustly estimating networks from two groups by using group-fused multiple graphical-lasso combined with stability selection, named GMGLASS. Specifically, by simultaneously estimating similar within-group networks and between-group difference, it is possible to address inter-subject variability of estimated individual networks inherently related with existing methods such as Fisher Z test, and issues related to JGMSS ignoring between-group information in group comparisons. To evaluate the performance of GMGLASS in terms of a few key network metrics, as well as to compare with JGMSS and Fisher Z test, they are applied to both simulated and in vivo data. As a method aiming for group comparison studies, our study involves two groups for each case, i.e., normal control and patient groups; for in vivo data, we focus on a group of patients with right mesial temporal lobe epilepsy.

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 12 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 12 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 25%
Student > Master 2 17%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Unknown 5 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 2 17%
Psychology 1 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Physics and Astronomy 1 8%
Engineering 1 8%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 6 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 03 January 2018.
All research outputs
#15,341,429
of 24,319,828 outputs
Outputs from Brain Topography
#283
of 506 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,270
of 450,391 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Topography
#12
of 14 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,319,828 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 506 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 450,391 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 14 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.