↓ Skip to main content

Pseudo-Bootstrap Network Analysis—an Application in Functional Connectivity Fingerprinting

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
15 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
Pseudo-Bootstrap Network Analysis—an Application in Functional Connectivity Fingerprinting
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00351
Pubmed ID
Authors

Hu Cheng, Ao Li, Andrea A. Koenigsberger, Chunfeng Huang, Yang Wang, Jinhua Sheng, Sharlene D. Newman

Abstract

Brain parcellation divides the brain's spatial domain into small regions, which are represented by nodes within the network analysis framework. While template-based parcellations are widely used, the parcels on the template do not necessarily match individual's functional nodes. A new method is developed to overcome the inconsistent network analysis results by by-passing the difficulties of parcellating the brain into functionally meaningful areas. First, roughly equal-sized parcellations are obtained. Second, these random parcellations are applied to individual subjects multiple times and a pseudo-bootstrap (PBS) of the network is obtained for statistical inferences. It was found that the variation of mean global network metrics from PBS sampling is smaller compared with inter-subject variation or within-subject variation between two diffusion MRI scans. Using the mean global network metrics from PBS sampling, the intra-class correlation is always higher than the average obtained from using a single random parcellation. As one application, the PBS method was tested on the Human Connectome Project resting state dataset to identify individuals across scan sessions based on the mean functional connectivity (FC)-a trivial network property that has little information about the connectivity between nodes. An accuracy rate of ∼90% was achieved by simply finding the maximum correlation of mean FC of PBS samples between two scan sessions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 20%
Student > Master 3 20%
Researcher 2 13%
Other 1 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 3 20%
Psychology 3 20%
Social Sciences 2 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 13%
Mathematics 1 7%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 4 27%
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 24 July 2017.
All research outputs
#15,981,470
of 24,319,828 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,075
of 7,462 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,112
of 316,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#120
of 151 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,319,828 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,462 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% 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 316,054 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 151 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.