Some statistical problems are added to the growing list of cautionary tales regarding the use of the conventional, ratio‐based nutritional indices (RCR, RGR, ECI, AD and ECD). Analysis of ratios is based on the, probably unrealistic, assumption of an isometric relationship between denominator and numerator variables. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) makes less restrictive assumptions, and additionally provides important information about the data which is lost by using ratio variables. We demonstrate, using computer‐generated data sets, some of the pitfalls of statistical analysis of ratios and illustrate how these may be avoided using ANCOVA. Some possible consequences of such statistical iniquities for biological interpretations are discussed.

Although graph theory has been around since the 18th century, the field of network science is more recent and continues to gain popularity, particularly in the field of neuroimaging. The field was propelled forward when Watts and Strogatz introduced their small-world network model, which described a network that provided regional specialization with efficient global information transfer. This model is appealing to the study of brain connectivity, as the brain can be viewed as a system with various interacting regions that produce complex behaviors. In practice, graph metrics such as clustering coefficient, path length, and efficiency measures are often used to characterize system properties. Centrality metrics such as degree, betweenness, closeness, and eigenvector centrality determine critical areas within the network. Community structure is also essential for understanding network organization and topology. Network science has led to a paradigm shift in the neuroscientific community, but it should be viewed as more than a simple ''tool du jour.'' To fully appreciate the utility of network science, a greater understanding of how network models apply to the brain is needed. An integrated appraisal of multiple network analyses should be performed to better understand network structure rather than focusing on univariate comparisons to find significant group differences; indeed, such comparisons, popular with traditional functional magnetic resonance imaging analyses, are arguably no longer relevant with graph-theory based approaches. These methods necessitate a philosophical shift toward complexity science. In this context, when correctly applied and interpreted, network scientific methods have a chance to revolutionize the understanding of brain function.

Exponential random graph models (ERGMs), also known as p* models, have been utilized extensively in the social science literature to study complex networks and how their global structure depends on underlying structural components. However, the literature on their use in biological networks (especially brain networks) has remained sparse. Descriptive models based on a specific feature of the graph (clustering coefficient, degree distribution, etc.) have dominated connectivity research in neuroscience. Corresponding generative models have been developed to reproduce one of these features. However, the complexity inherent in whole-brain network data necessitates the development and use of tools that allow the systematic exploration of several features simultaneously and how they interact to form the global network architecture. ERGMs provide a statistically principled approach to the assessment of how a set of interacting local brain network features gives rise to the global structure. We illustrate the utility of ERGMs for modeling, analyzing, and simulating complex whole-brain networks with network data from normal subjects. We also provide a foundation for the selection of important local features through the implementation and assessment of three selection approaches: a traditional p-value based backward selection approach, an information criterion approach (AIC), and a graphical goodness of fit (GOF) approach. The graphical GOF approach serves as the best method given the scientific interest in being able to capture and reproduce the structure of fitted brain networks.

Group-based brain connectivity networks have great appeal for researchers interested in gaining further insight into complex brain function and how it changes across different mental states and disease conditions. Accurately constructing these networks presents a daunting challenge given the difficulties associated with accounting for inter-subject topological variability. Viable approaches to this task must engender networks that capture the constitutive topological properties of the group of subjects’ networks that it is aiming to represent. The conventional approach has been to use a mean or median correlation network (Achard et al., 2006; Song et al., 2009; Zuo et al., 2011) to embody a group of networks. However, the degree to which their topological properties conform with those of the groups that they are purported to represent has yet to be explored. Here we investigate the performance of these mean and median correlation networks. We also propose an alternative approach based on an exponential random graph modeling framework and compare its performance to that of the aforementioned conventional approach. Simpson et al. (2011) illustrated the utility of exponential random graph models (ERGMs) for creating brain networks that capture the topological characteristics of a single subject’s brain network. However, their advantageousness in the context of producing a brain network that “represents” a group of brain networks has yet to be examined. Here we show that our proposed ERGM approach outperforms the conventional mean and median correlation based approaches and provides an accurate and flexible method for constructing group-based representative brain networks.

Complex functional brain network analyses have exploded over the last decade, gaining traction due to their profound clinical implications. The application of network science (an interdisciplinary offshoot of graph theory) has facilitated these analyses and enabled examining the brain as an integrated system that produces complex behaviors. While the field of statistics has been integral in advancing activation analyses and some connectivity analyses in functional neuroimaging research, it has yet to play a commensurate role in complex network analyses. Fusing novel statistical methods with network-based functional neuroimage analysis will engender powerful analytical tools that will aid in our understanding of normal brain function as well as alterations due to various brain disorders. Here we survey widely used statistical and network science tools for analyzing fMRI network data and discuss the challenges faced in filling some of the remaining methodological gaps. When applied and interpreted correctly, the fusion of network scientific and statistical methods has a chance to revolutionize the understanding of brain function.

The reliability of graph metrics calculated in network analysis is essential to the interpretation of complex network organization. These graph metrics are used to deduce the small-world properties in networks. In this study, we investigated the test-retest reliability of graph metrics from functional magnetic resonance imaging data collected for two runs in 45 healthy older adults. Graph metrics were calculated on data for both runs and compared using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) statistics and Bland–Altman (BA) plots. ICC scores describe the level of absolute agreement between two measurements and provide a measure of reproducibility. For mean graph metrics, ICC scores were high for clustering coefficient (ICC = 0.86), global efficiency (ICC = 0.83), path length (ICC = 0.79), and local efficiency (ICC = 0.75); the ICC score for degree was found to be low (ICC = 0.29). ICC scores were also used to generate reproducibility maps in brain space to test voxel-wise reproducibility for unsmoothed and smoothed data. Reproducibility was uniform across the brain for global efficiency and path length, but was only high in network hubs for clustering coefficient, local efficiency, and degree. BA plots were used to test the measurement repeatability of all graph metrics. All graph metrics fell within the limits for repeatability. Together, these results suggest that with exception of degree, mean graph metrics are reproducible and suitable for clinical studies. Further exploration is warranted to better understand reproducibility across the brain on a voxel-wise basis.

The convenience of linear mixed models for Gaussian data has led to their widespread use. Unfortunately, standard mixed model tests often have greatly inflated test size in small samples. Many applications with correlated outcomes in medical imaging and other fields have simple properties which do not require the generality of a mixed model. Alternately, stating the special cases as a general linear multivariate model allows analysing them with either the univariate or multivariate approach to repeated measures (UNIREP, MULTIREP). Even in small samples, an appropriate UNIREP or MULTIREP test always controls test size and has a good power approximation, in sharp contrast to mixed model tests. Hence, mixed model tests should never be used when one of the UNIREP tests (uncorrected, Huynh-Feldt, Geisser-Greenhouse, Box conservative) or MULTIREP tests (Wilks, Hotelling-Lawley, Roy's, Pillai-Bartlett) apply. Convenient methods give exact power for the uncorrected and Box conservative tests. Simulations demonstrate that new power approximations for all four UNIREP tests eliminate most inaccuracy in existing methods. In turn, free software implements the approximations to give a better choice of sample size. Two repeated measures power analyses illustrate the methods. The examples highlight the advantages of examining the entire response surface of power as a function of sample size, mean differences, and variability.

Brain network analyses have moved to the forefront of neuroimaging research over the last decade. However, methods for statistically comparing groups of networks have lagged behind. These comparisons have great appeal for researchers interested in gaining further insight into complex brain function and how it changes across different mental states and disease conditions. Current comparison approaches generally either rely on a summary metric or on mass-univariate nodal or edge-based comparisons that ignore the inherent topological properties of the network, yielding little power and failing to make network level comparisons. Gleaning deeper insights into normal and abnormal changes in complex brain function demands methods that take advantage of the wealth of data present in an entire brain network. Here we propose a permutation testing framework that allows comparing groups of networks while incorporating topological features inherent in each individual network. We validate our approach using simulated data with known group differences. We then apply the method to functional brain networks derived from fMRI data.