2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.068
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Connectivity differences in brain networks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
215
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 230 publications
(218 citation statements)
references
References 59 publications
3
215
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is now technically possible to construct similar connectomes in rodent models of disease where cortical connectopathies (39) are hypothesized, and it will be important to develop effective statistical methods for testing these hypotheses by comparing connectomes at the cellular (micrometer) and synaptic (nanometer) levels for a particular species-an approach already being applied successfully at the regional (millimeter) level for human imaging studies (40). It will be even more challenging to develop rigorous comparisons of connectomes between species, where the difficult problem of establishing homologies like those proposed here between rodent and human cortical regionalization (Fig.…”
Section: M2 M1mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is now technically possible to construct similar connectomes in rodent models of disease where cortical connectopathies (39) are hypothesized, and it will be important to develop effective statistical methods for testing these hypotheses by comparing connectomes at the cellular (micrometer) and synaptic (nanometer) levels for a particular species-an approach already being applied successfully at the regional (millimeter) level for human imaging studies (40). It will be even more challenging to develop rigorous comparisons of connectomes between species, where the difficult problem of establishing homologies like those proposed here between rodent and human cortical regionalization (Fig.…”
Section: M2 M1mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The “real” observed data were compared to the null distribution to obtain a statistical significance. As the same original univariate threshold was applied to both surrogate and real data, protection against false positives due to multiple comparisons is provided at any threshold 49, 50. The results were visualized using BrainNet Viewer51 and we plotted significant connections at a threshold of P < 0.05.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A conservative test threshold of t = 3.3 (corresponding to P = 0.006) was chosen in order to focus on strong, focal subnetwork differences. 43 Results corresponding to a relatively liberal height threshold of t = 3.0 are provided in Supplementary Figure 3. This threshold, which is the default optimisation within NBS, identifies larger, more distributed subnetworks.…”
Section: Network-based Statisticsmentioning
confidence: 99%