pith. sign in

arxiv: 2305.02369 · v2 · submitted 2023-05-03 · 🧬 q-bio.NC

Diffuse and Localized Functional Dysconnectivity in Schizophrenia: a Bootstrapped Top-Down Approach

Davide Coluzzi , Giuseppe Baselli This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 08:43 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧬 q-bio.NC
keywords schizophreniafunctional connectivitybootstrappingdefault mode networkdysconnectivitymulti-level analysisbrain networksfrontal lobe
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bootstrapped multi-level analysis detects diffuse DMN dysconnectivity and 13 localized frontal differences in schizophrenia despite small samples.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tests a multi-level functional connectivity approach on data from 12 schizophrenia patients and 15 controls to separate global network trends from specific dysconnections. It applies bootstrapping alongside direct tests and robustness checks that drop one or two subjects, then examines the default mode network subgraph plus local graph indexes and edge weights. The method is presented as yielding more stable results than raw data testing, with findings of reduced DMN connectivity and strength plus increased deactivation in patients, and thirteen areas showing group differences concentrated in the frontal lobe. A sympathetic reader would care because the work directly addresses how to extract reliable patterns from the small cohorts typical in clinical brain imaging.

Core claim

Using functional connectivity between 74 AAL regions, the authors show that bootstrapped multi-level analysis via the SPIDER-NET tool produces more stable group comparisons than direct testing. Global trends match expectations, while the DMN subgraph exhibits reduced connectivity, reduced strength, and increased deactivation in the schizophrenia group. At the local level, thirteen areas differ significantly at p<0.05, with greater divergence in the frontal lobe; negative-edge analysis further indicates inverted prefronto-temporal connectivity. The conclusion states that multi-level bootstrapped analysis is recommended when diffuse and localized dysconnections must be studied in limited样本.

What carries the argument

Bootstrapped (BOOT) multi-level evaluation of graph topological indexes and connection weights with the SPIDER-NET tool, including DMN subgraph analysis and robustness tests that remove one (RST1) or two (RST2) subjects.

If this is right

  • Global integration trends remain detectable but appear more stable under bootstrapping than under direct data testing.
  • The DMN exhibits reduced connectivity and strength together with increased deactivation in the schizophrenia group.
  • Thirteen brain areas differ significantly between groups, with the largest effects concentrated in the frontal lobe.
  • Negative-edge analysis reveals inverted connectivity between prefronto-temporal areas in patients.
  • Multi-level bootstrapped analysis is required to reliably separate diffuse from localized dysconnections when sample sizes are limited.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Omitting bootstrapping in similarly small cohorts may cause localized frontal effects to be missed or to appear unstable.
  • The frontal emphasis suggests the method could be used to test whether specific connectivity changes track cognitive symptom severity.
  • The same top-down bootstrapped pipeline could be applied to other disorders that show mixed global and regional connectivity alterations.
  • Replicating the thirteen-area pattern on an independent larger cohort would strengthen the case for using this approach in clinical studies.

Load-bearing premise

Bootstrapping on samples of only twelve schizophrenia and fifteen control subjects produces stable, unbiased estimates of connectivity differences rather than being dominated by the limited original data distribution.

What would settle it

Repeating the identical pipeline on the same small dataset but without the bootstrapping step and finding that the thirteen local areas or the DMN effects lose statistical significance or shift markedly would falsify the claim that bootstrapping improves robustness.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2305.02369 by Davide Coluzzi, Giuseppe Baselli.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Pipeline of the top-down approach proposed. The functional connectivity matrices of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Table of all graph properties considered, divided according to the level of analysis. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Schema representing the robustness statistical test randomly removing two subjects (black [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Connectograms composed by only nodes of the DMN and positive connections between [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Distributions of the local degree values in the two populations divided according to nodes of DMN in left and right hemisphere (yellow) or not (gray) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Distributions of the local strength values in the two populations divided according to the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Connectograms of the communities detected in the negative average group networks. On [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Connectograms of negative average group networks. a) and b) are the results on the whole-brain, c) and d) on only the DMN of SZ and HC groups respectively. 5% density thresholding is applied on the shown connectograms for graphical clarity only. Then we visualize the strongest and frequent negative edges in the whole brain and in the DMN, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Schizophrenia (SZ) is a brain disorder leading to detached mind's normally integrated processes. Hence, the exploration of the symptoms in relation to functional connectivity (FC) had great relevance in the field. FC can be investigated on different levels, going from global features to single edges between regions, revealing diffuse and localized dysconnection patterns. In this context, SZ is characterized by a diverse global integration with reduced connectivity in specific areas of the Default Mode Network (DMN). However, the assessment of FC presents various sources of uncertainty. This study proposes a multi-level approach for more robust group-comparison. FC between 74 AAL brain areas of 15 healthy controls (HC) and 12 SZ subjects were used. Multi-level analyses and graph topological indexes evaluation were carried out by the previously published SPIDER-NET tool. Robustness was augmented by bootstrapped (BOOT) data and the stability was evaluated by removing one (RST1) or two subjects (RST2). The DMN subgraph was evaluated, toegether with overall local indexes and connection weights to enhance common activations/deactivations. At a global level, expected trends were found. The robustness assessment tests highlighted more stable results for BOOT compared to the direct data testing. Conversely, significant results were found in the analysis at lower levels. The DMN highlighted reduced connectivity and strength as well as increased deactivation in the SZ group. At local level, 13 areas were found to be significantly different ($p<0.05$), highlighting a greater divergence in the frontal lobe. These results were confirmed analyzing the negative edges, suggesting inverted connectivity between prefronto-temporal areas. In conclusion, multi-level analysis supported by BOOT is highly recommended, especially when diffuse and localized dysconnections must be investigated in limited samples.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a bootstrapped multi-level approach (BOOT) using SPIDER-NET to investigate functional connectivity differences in schizophrenia (12 SZ vs 15 HC, 74 AAL regions), comparing global trends, DMN subgraph, and local indexes. It claims BOOT provides more stable results than direct testing or RST1/RST2, reports reduced DMN connectivity/strength and increased deactivation in SZ, identifies 13 significant local areas (p<0.05) especially in frontal lobe, and recommends the method for limited samples.

Significance. If substantiated, this would support the use of bootstrapped multi-level FC analysis for detecting both diffuse and localized dysconnections in small cohorts, a common challenge in schizophrenia research. The emphasis on DMN and frontal areas aligns with existing literature, but the small sample and methodological concerns limit immediate impact. Strengths include the comprehensive multi-level framework.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The statement that 'the robustness assessment tests highlighted more stable results for BOOT compared to the direct data testing' is presented without quantitative metrics of stability (such as standard errors, coefficient of variation, or agreement indices between runs), making it impossible to verify the superiority claim that underpins the paper's recommendation.
  2. [Abstract] The report of 13 areas significantly different at p<0.05 does not indicate whether multiple-comparison correction was applied across the 74 regions (or the number of edges tested); without this, the localized findings risk inflated type I error and do not strongly support the claim of greater frontal divergence.
  3. [Abstract] With only 12 SZ and 15 HC subjects, the bootstrapping procedure necessarily re-samples from a very limited empirical distribution; this raises a correctness concern for the central claim that BOOT yields unbiased and stable estimates of group differences, as the replicates are highly dependent on the original small sample rather than population variability.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Typographical error: 'toegether' should read 'together'.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their valuable comments, which help improve the clarity and rigor of our work. Below we address each major comment in turn.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] The statement that 'the robustness assessment tests highlighted more stable results for BOOT compared to the direct data testing' is presented without quantitative metrics of stability (such as standard errors, coefficient of variation, or agreement indices between runs), making it impossible to verify the superiority claim that underpins the paper's recommendation.

    Authors: We agree with this observation. The abstract summarizes the finding but does not include specific quantitative metrics. In the manuscript, stability is assessed through consistency of results across BOOT, RST1, and RST2, but we will revise to include quantitative measures such as the proportion of bootstrap replicates showing the same significant regions or variability in connectivity estimates to better support the claim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The report of 13 areas significantly different at p<0.05 does not indicate whether multiple-comparison correction was applied across the 74 regions (or the number of edges tested); without this, the localized findings risk inflated type I error and do not strongly support the claim of greater frontal divergence.

    Authors: The analysis used uncorrected p-values at the threshold of 0.05, as is common in exploratory analyses of this type with small samples to avoid excessive type II errors. We recognize the risk of inflated type I error and will add a statement in the abstract and methods clarifying that these are uncorrected p-values, along with a discussion of the multiple testing issue in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract] With only 12 SZ and 15 HC subjects, the bootstrapping procedure necessarily re-samples from a very limited empirical distribution; this raises a correctness concern for the central claim that BOOT yields unbiased and stable estimates of group differences, as the replicates are highly dependent on the original small sample rather than population variability.

    Authors: Bootstrapping here is employed to evaluate the robustness of the observed group differences within the available sample by generating multiple resamples, which is a standard technique for assessing stability in small-sample studies. While we acknowledge that it does not provide estimates independent of the original sample's limitations, the method allows comparison of stability relative to direct testing. We will revise the text to more precisely describe the scope of the stability assessment and its limitations regarding population inference. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; analysis is data-driven and self-contained

full rationale

The paper applies standard graph-theoretic and bootstrapping procedures via the external SPIDER-NET tool to empirical fMRI connectivity matrices from 27 subjects. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are used to define the reported group differences, stability comparisons, or DMN/local findings; all quantities are computed directly from the input correlation matrices and subject labels. The recommendation for BOOT over direct testing or RST1/RST2 rests on observed numerical stability across the actual data partitions, not on any definitional reduction or imported uniqueness theorem. This is the normal case of an empirical pipeline whose outputs are not forced by its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard assumptions of BOLD-signal-derived functional connectivity and graph metrics; no free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced beyond those implicit in the SPIDER-NET pipeline and AAL atlas.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Functional connectivity estimated from resting-state fMRI BOLD time series between AAL regions accurately reflects underlying neural communication differences between groups.
    Invoked throughout the multi-level FC and graph analysis sections of the abstract.
  • domain assumption Bootstrapping on n=12 and n=15 samples produces stable group-difference estimates without substantial bias from the original data distribution.
    Central to the robustness assessment (BOOT, RST1, RST2) described in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5860 in / 1455 out tokens · 26422 ms · 2026-05-24T08:43:46.454604+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

90 extracted references · 90 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Weight-conserving characterization of complex functional brain net- works

    Rubinov M, Sporns O. Weight-conserving characterization of complex functional brain net- works. NeuroImage, 2011. 56(4):2068–2079. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.069

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.069 2011

  2. [2]

    An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest.NeuroImage, 2006

    Desikan RS, S ´egonne F, Fischl B, Quinn BT, Dickerson BC, Blacker D, Buckner RL, Dale AM, Maguire RP, Hyman BT, Albert MS, Killiany RJ. An automated labeling system for subdividing the human cerebral cortex on MRI scans into gyral based regions of interest.NeuroImage, 2006. 31(3):968–980. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.021

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.021 2006

  3. [4]

    Fundamentals of Brain Network Analysis

    Fornito A, Zalesky A, Bullmore ET. Fundamentals of Brain Network Analysis. Elsevier/ Aca- demic Press, 2016. ISBN 9780124079083. doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-407908-3.09996-9

    work page doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-407908-3.09996-9 2016

  4. [5]

    Small worldness in dense and weighted connectomes

    Colon-Perez LM, Couret M, Triplett W, Price CC, Mareci TH. Small worldness in dense and weighted connectomes. Frontiers in Physics , 2016. 4(MAY):1–15. doi:10.3389/fphy.2016. 00014

    work page doi:10.3389/fphy.2016 2016

  5. [6]

    Network neuroscience

    Bassett DS, Sporns O. Network neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience, 2017. 20(3):353–364. doi:10.1038/nn.4502

    work page doi:10.1038/nn.4502 2017

  6. [7]

    Network-based statistic: Identifying differences in brain networks

    Zalesky A, Fornito A, Bullmore ET. Network-based statistic: Identifying differences in brain networks. NeuroImage, 2010. 53(4):1197–1207. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.041

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.041 2010

  7. [8]

    Medial temporal lobe connectivity and its associations with cognition in early Alzheimer’s disease

    Berron D, van Westen D, Ossenkoppele R, Strandberg O, Hansson O. Medial temporal lobe connectivity and its associations with cognition in early Alzheimer’s disease. Brain, 2020. 143(4):1233–1248. doi:10.1093/brain/awaa068

    work page doi:10.1093/brain/awaa068 2020

  8. [9]

    Resting-State Functional Brain Connectivity for Human Mentalizing: Biobehavioral Mechanisms of Theory of Mind in Multiple Sclerosis

    Isernia S, Pirastru A, Massaro D, Rovaris M, Marchetti A, Baglio F. Resting-State Functional Brain Connectivity for Human Mentalizing: Biobehavioral Mechanisms of Theory of Mind in Multiple Sclerosis. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience , 2021. doi:10.1093/scan/ nsab120

    work page doi:10.1093/scan/ 2021

  9. [10]

    Disrupted modular organization of primary sensory brain areas in schizophrenia

    Bordier C, Nicolini C, Forcellini G, Bifone A. Disrupted modular organization of primary sensory brain areas in schizophrenia. NeuroImage: Clinical , 2018. 18:682–693. doi: 10.1016/j.nicl.2018.02.035

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2018.02.035 2018

  10. [11]

    Biomarker Investigation using Multiple Brain Measures from MRI through XAI in Alzheimer’s Disease Classification” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.03056, 2023

    Coluzzi D, Bordin V , Rivolta MW, Fortel I, Zhang L, Leow A, Baselli G. Biomarker Investigation using Multiple Brain Measures from MRI through XAI in Alzheimer’s Disease Classification” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.03056, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  11. [12]

    Development and Testing of SPIDER-NET: An Interactive Tool for Brain Connectogram Visualization, Sub- Network Exploration and Graph Metrics Quantification

    Coluzzi D, Pirastru A, Pelizzari L, Cabinio M, Lagan `a MM, Baselli G, Baglio F. Development and Testing of SPIDER-NET: An Interactive Tool for Brain Connectogram Visualization, Sub- Network Exploration and Graph Metrics Quantification. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2022. 16. URL https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnins.2022.818385

    work page doi:10.3389/fnins.2022.818385 2022

  12. [13]

    Altered topology of large-scale structural brain networks in chronic stroke

    Cheng B, Schlemm E, Schulz R, Boenstrup M, Mess ´e A, Hilgetag C, Gerloff C, Thomalla G. Altered topology of large-scale structural brain networks in chronic stroke. Brain Communi- cations, 2019. 1(1). doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcz020. URL https://doi.org/10.1093/ braincomms/fcz020

    work page doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcz020 2019

  13. [14]

    Alzheimer’s disease disrupts rich club organization in brain connectivity networks.Proceedings - International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging, 2013

    Daianu M, Dennis EL, Jahanshad N, Nir TM, Toga AW, Jack CR, Weiner MW, Thompson PM. Alzheimer’s disease disrupts rich club organization in brain connectivity networks.Proceedings - International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging, 2013. pp. 266–269. doi:10.1109/ISBI.2013. 6556463. 192 D. Coluzzi and G. Baselli / Diffuse and Localized Functional Dysconnectivi...

    work page doi:10.1109/isbi.2013 2013

  14. [15]

    Network analysis detects changes in the contralesional hemisphere following stroke

    Crofts JJ, Higham DJ, Bosnell R, Jbabdi S, Matthews PM, Behrens T, Johansen-Berg H. Network analysis detects changes in the contralesional hemisphere following stroke. NeuroImage, 2011. 54(1):161–169. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.032

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.032 2011

  15. [16]

    Schizophrenia, neuroimaging and connectomics

    Fornito A, Zalesky A, Pantelis C, Bullmore ET. Schizophrenia, neuroimaging and connectomics. NeuroImage, 2012. 62(4):2296–2314. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.12.090

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.12.090 2012

  16. [17]

    Disrupted small- world networks in schizophrenia

    Liu Y , Liang M, Zhou Y , He Y , Hao Y , Song M, Yu C, Liu H, Liu Z, Jiang T. Disrupted small- world networks in schizophrenia. Brain, 2008. 131(4):945–961. doi:10.1093/brain/awn018

    work page doi:10.1093/brain/awn018 2008

  17. [18]

    Disrupted modularity and local connectivity of brain functional networks in childhood-onset schizophrenia

    Alexander-Bloch AF, Gogtay N, Meunier D, Birn R, Clasen L, Lalonde F, Lenroot R, Giedd J, Bullmore ET. Disrupted modularity and local connectivity of brain functional networks in childhood-onset schizophrenia. Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, 2010. 4(October):1–16. doi: 10.3389/fnsys.2010.00147

    work page doi:10.3389/fnsys.2010.00147 2010

  18. [19]

    Func- tional Connectivity and Brain Networks in Schizophrenia

    Lynall ME, Bassett DS, Kerwin R, McKenna PJ, Kitzbichler M, Muller U, Bullmore E. Func- tional Connectivity and Brain Networks in Schizophrenia. Journal of Neuroscience , 2010. 30(28):9477–9487. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0333-10.2010

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.0333-10.2010 2010

  19. [20]

    General and Specific Functional Con- nectivity Disturbances in First-Episode Schizophrenia During Cognitive Control Performance

    Fornito A, Yoon J, Zalesky A, Bullmore ET, Carter CS. General and Specific Functional Con- nectivity Disturbances in First-Episode Schizophrenia During Cognitive Control Performance. Biological Psychiatry, 2011. 70(1):64–72. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.02.019

    work page doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.02.019 2011

  20. [21]

    Brain Connectivity Is Not Only Lower but Different in Schizophrenia: A Com- bined Anatomical and Functional Approach

    Skudlarski P, Jagannathan K, Anderson K, Stevens MC, Calhoun VD, Skudlarska BA, Pearl- son G. Brain Connectivity Is Not Only Lower but Different in Schizophrenia: A Com- bined Anatomical and Functional Approach. Biological Psychiatry, 2010. 68(1):61–69. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.03.035

    work page doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.03.035 2010

  21. [22]

    A Review of the Functional and Anatomical Default Mode Network in Schizophrenia

    Hu ML, Zong XF, Mann JJ, Zheng JJ, Liao YH, Li ZC, He Y , Chen XG, Tang JS. A Review of the Functional and Anatomical Default Mode Network in Schizophrenia. Neuroscience Bulletin,

    work page

  22. [23]

    doi:10.1007/s12264-016-0090-1

    33(1):73–84. doi:10.1007/s12264-016-0090-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s12264-016-0090-1

  23. [24]

    Functional Connectivity of Cognitive Brain Networks in Schizophrenia during a Working Memory Task

    Godwin D, Ji A, Kandala S, Mamah D. Functional Connectivity of Cognitive Brain Networks in Schizophrenia during a Working Memory Task. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2017. 8. doi:10.3389/ fpsyt.2017.00294

    work page arXiv 2017

  24. [25]

    Altered intrinsic and extrinsic connectivity in schizophrenia

    Zhou Y , Zeidman P, Wu S, Razi A, Chen C, Yang L, Zou J, Wang G, Wang H, Friston KJ. Altered intrinsic and extrinsic connectivity in schizophrenia. NeuroImage: Clinical, 2018. 17:704–716. doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2017.12.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nicl.2017.12.006 2018

  25. [26]

    Dynamic functional connectivity: Promise, issues, and interpretations

    Hutchison RM, Womelsdorf T, Allen EA, Bandettini PA, Calhoun VD, Corbetta M, Della Penna S, Duyn JH, Glover GH, Gonzalez-Castillo J, Handwerker DA, Keilholz S, Kiviniemi V , Leopold DA, de Pasquale F, Sporns O, Walter M, Chang C. Dynamic functional connectivity: Promise, issues, and interpretations. NeuroImage, 2013. 80:360–378. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.05 2013

  26. [27]

    Brain network dynamics in schizophrenia: Reduced dynamism of the default mode network

    Kottaram A, Johnston LA, Cocchi L, Ganella EP, Everall I, Pantelis C, Kotagiri R, Zalesky A. Brain network dynamics in schizophrenia: Reduced dynamism of the default mode network. Human Brain Mapping, 2019. 40(7):2212–2228. doi:10.1002/hbm.24519

    work page doi:10.1002/hbm.24519 2019

  27. [28]

    Saarinen, M.-L

    Li ´egeois R, Laumann TO, Snyder AZ, Zhou J, Yeo BTT. Interpreting temporal fluctuations in resting-state functional connectivity MRI. NeuroImage, 2017. 163:437–455. doi:10.1016/j. neuroimage.2017.09.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j 2017

  28. [29]

    Can sliding-window correlations reveal dynamic functional connectivity in resting-state fMRI? Neu- roImage, 2016

    Hindriks R, Adhikari MH, Murayama Y , Ganzetti M, Mantini D, Logothetis NK, Deco G. Can sliding-window correlations reveal dynamic functional connectivity in resting-state fMRI? Neu- roImage, 2016. 127:242–256. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.11.055

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.11.055 2016

  29. [30]

    On spurious and real fluctuations of dynamic functional connectiv- ity during rest

    Leonardi N, Van De Ville D. On spurious and real fluctuations of dynamic functional connectiv- ity during rest. NeuroImage, 2015. 104:430–436. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.09.007 2015

  30. [31]

    Evaluating dynamic bivariate correlations in resting- state fMRI: A comparison study and a new approach

    Lindquist MA, Xu Y , Nebel MB, Caffo BS. Evaluating dynamic bivariate correlations in resting- state fMRI: A comparison study and a new approach. NeuroImage, 2014. 101:531–546. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.052

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.06.052 2014

  31. [32]

    Towards a statistical test for functional connectivity dynamics

    Zalesky A, Breakspear M. Towards a statistical test for functional connectivity dynamics. Neu- roImage, 2015. 114:466–470. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.047

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.03.047 2015

  32. [33]

    Bootstrap white matter tractography (BOOT-TRAC)

    Lazar M, Alexander AL. Bootstrap white matter tractography (BOOT-TRAC). NeuroImage,

    work page

  33. [34]

    doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.08.050

    24(2):524–532. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.08.050

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.08.050 2004

  34. [35]

    Sampling distributions and the bootstrap.Nature methods, 2015

    Kulesa A, Krzywinski M, Blainey P, Altman N. Sampling distributions and the bootstrap.Nature methods, 2015. 12(6):477–478

    work page 2015

  35. [36]

    Bootstrap quantification of estimation uncer- tainties in network degree distributions

    Gel YR, Lyubchich V , Ramirez Ramirez LL. Bootstrap quantification of estimation uncer- tainties in network degree distributions. Scientific Reports, 2017. 7(1):5807. doi:10.1038/ s41598-017-05885-x

    work page 2017

  36. [37]

    Bootstrapping exchangeable random graphs

    Green A, Shalizi CR. Bootstrapping exchangeable random graphs. Electronic Journal of Statis- tics, 2022. 16(1):1058–1095. doi:10.1214/21-EJS1896

    work page doi:10.1214/21-ejs1896 2022

  37. [38]

    Application of bootstrap method in conservative estima- tion of reliability with limited samples

    Picheny V , Kim NH, Haftka RT. Application of bootstrap method in conservative estima- tion of reliability with limited samples. Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization , 2010. 41(2):205–217. doi:10.1007/s00158-009-0419-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s00158-009-0419-8 2010

  38. [39]

    Bootstrapping promotes the RSFC-behavior associations: An application of individual cognitive traits prediction

    Wei L, Jing B, Li H. Bootstrapping promotes the RSFC-behavior associations: An application of individual cognitive traits prediction. Human Brain Mapping, 2020. 41(9):2302–2316. doi: 10.1002/hbm.24947

    work page doi:10.1002/hbm.24947 2020

  39. [40]

    Levodopa modulates small-world architecture of functional brain networks in Parkinson’s disease

    Berman BD, Smucny J, Wylie KP, Shelton E, Kronberg E, Leehey M, Tregellas JR. Levodopa modulates small-world architecture of functional brain networks in Parkinson’s disease. Move- ment Disorders, 2016. 31(11):1676–1684. doi:10.1002/mds.26713. 194 D. Coluzzi and G. Baselli / Diffuse and Localized Functional Dysconnectivity in Schizophrenia

    work page doi:10.1002/mds.26713 2016

  40. [41]

    Propor- tional thresholding in resting-state fMRI functional connectivity networks and consequences for patient-control connectome studies: Issues and recommendations

    van den Heuvel MP, de Lange SC, Zalesky A, Seguin C, Yeo BTT, Schmidt R. Propor- tional thresholding in resting-state fMRI functional connectivity networks and consequences for patient-control connectome studies: Issues and recommendations. NeuroImage, 2017. 152:437–

    work page 2017

  41. [42]

    doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.02.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.02.005 2017

  42. [43]

    Cognition and resting-state functional connectivity in schizophrenia

    Sheffield JM, Barch DM. Cognition and resting-state functional connectivity in schizophrenia. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 2016. 61:108–120. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.12. 007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2015.12 2016

  43. [44]

    Modularity and community structure in networks

    Newman ME. Modularity and community structure in networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2006. 103(23):8577–8582. doi:10.1073/pnas.0601602103

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.0601602103 2006

  44. [45]

    An introduction to the bootstrap

    Efron B, Tibshirani R. An introduction to the bootstrap. Monographs on statistics and applied probability. Chapman & Hall, New York, 1993. ISBN 978-0-412-04231-7

    work page 1993

  45. [46]

    A bootstrap approach is a superior statistical method for the com- parison of non-normal data with differing variances

    Johnston MG, Faulkner C. A bootstrap approach is a superior statistical method for the com- parison of non-normal data with differing variances. New Phytologist, 2021. 230(1):23–26. doi:10.1111/nph.17159

    work page doi:10.1111/nph.17159 2021

  46. [47]

    The Default Mode Network in Healthy Aging and Alzheimer’s Disease

    Mevel K, Ch ´etelat G, Eustache F, Desgranges B. The Default Mode Network in Healthy Aging and Alzheimer’s Disease. International Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 2011. 2011:535816. doi:10.4061/2011/535816

    work page doi:10.4061/2011/535816 2011

  47. [48]

    The default mode network and social understanding of others: what do brain connectivity studies tell us

    Li W, Mai X, Liu C. The default mode network and social understanding of others: what do brain connectivity studies tell us. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 2014. 8. URL https: //www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00074

    work page doi:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00074 2014

  48. [49]

    Systems Neuroscience in Late-Life Depression

    Manning KJ, Steffens DC. Systems Neuroscience in Late-Life Depression. In: Sys- tems Neuroscience in Depression, pp. 325–340. Academic Press, San Diego. ISBN 978- 0-12-802456-0, 2016. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/ B978012802456000011X

    work page 2016

  49. [50]

    An improved neuroanatomical model of the default-mode network reconciles previous neu- roimaging and neuropathological findings

    Alves PN, Foulon C, Karolis V , Bzdok D, Margulies DS, V olle E, Thiebaut de Schotten M. An improved neuroanatomical model of the default-mode network reconciles previous neu- roimaging and neuropathological findings. Communications Biology, 2019. 2(1):1–14. doi: 10.1038/s42003-019-0611-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s42003-019-0611-3 2019

  50. [51]

    Exploring the brain network: A review on resting-state fMRI functional connectivity

    van den Heuvel MP, Hulshoff Pol HE. Exploring the brain network: A review on resting-state fMRI functional connectivity. European Neuropsychopharmacology, 2010. 20(8):519–534. doi: 10.1016/j.euroneuro.2010.03.008

    work page doi:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2010.03.008 2010

  51. [52]

    Exploring resting-state functional connectivity invariants across the lifespan in healthy people by means of a recently proposed graph theoretical model

    Finotelli P, Dipasquale O, Costantini I, Pini A, Baglio F. . . Exploring resting-state functional connectivity invariants across the lifespan in healthy people by means of a recently proposed graph theoretical model. - PLoS One, 2018. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0206567

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0206567 2018

  52. [53]

    Complex network measures of brain connectivity: Uses and interpreta- tions

    Rubinov M, Sporns O. Complex network measures of brain connectivity: Uses and interpreta- tions. NeuroImage, 2010. 52(3):1059–1069. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.003. D. Coluzzi and G. Baselli / Diffuse and Localized Functional Dysconnectivity in Schizophrenia 195

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.003 2010

  53. [54]

    Early Life Adversities and Borderline Intellectual Functioning Negatively Impact Limbic System Connectivity in Childhood: A Connectomics- Based Study

    Blasi V , Pirastru A, Cabinio M, Di Tella S, Lagan`a MM, Giangiacomo A, Baglio G, Zanette M, Canevini MP, Walder M, Clerici M, Baglio F. Early Life Adversities and Borderline Intellectual Functioning Negatively Impact Limbic System Connectivity in Childhood: A Connectomics- Based Study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2020. 11. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.497116. URL...

    work page doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.497116 2020

  54. [55]

    Small-World Brain Networks Revisited

    Bassett DS, Bullmore ET. Small-World Brain Networks Revisited. The Neuroscientist, 2017. 23(5):499–516. doi:10.1177/1073858416667720. Publisher: SAGE Publications Inc STM

    work page doi:10.1177/1073858416667720 2017

  55. [56]

    Quantifying the Variability in Resting-State Networks

    Oliver I, Hlinka J, Kopal J, Davidsen J. Quantifying the Variability in Resting-State Networks. Entropy, 2019. 21(9):882. doi:10.3390/e21090882. Number: 9 publisher: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute

    work page doi:10.3390/e21090882 2019

  56. [57]

    Hippocampal Network Modularity Is Associated With Rela- tional Memory Dysfunction in Schizophrenia

    Avery SN, Rogers BP, Heckers S. Hippocampal Network Modularity Is Associated With Rela- tional Memory Dysfunction in Schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging, 2018. 3(5):423–432. doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2018.02.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.bpsc.2018.02.001 2018

  57. [58]

    Fragmentation: loss of global coherence or breakdown of modularity in functional brain architecture? Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience,

    van den Berg D, Gong P, Breakspear M, van Leeuwen C. Fragmentation: loss of global coherence or breakdown of modularity in functional brain architecture? Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience,

    work page

  58. [59]

    URL https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnsys.2012.00020

    6. URL https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnsys.2012.00020

    work page doi:10.3389/fnsys.2012.00020 2012

  59. [60]

    Brain Networks in Schizophrenia

    van den Heuvel MP, Fornito A. Brain Networks in Schizophrenia. Neuropsychology Review,

    work page

  60. [61]

    doi:10.1007/s11065-014-9248-7

    24(1):32–48. doi:10.1007/s11065-014-9248-7

    work page doi:10.1007/s11065-014-9248-7

  61. [62]

    Al- tered Topological Properties of Functional Network Connectivity in Schizophrenia during Rest- ing State: A Small-World Brain Network Study

    Yu Q, Sui J, Rachakonda S, He H, Gruner W, Pearlson G, Kiehl KA, Calhoun VD. Al- tered Topological Properties of Functional Network Connectivity in Schizophrenia during Rest- ing State: A Small-World Brain Network Study. PLOS ONE , 2011. 6(9):e25423. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0025423. Public Library of Science

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0025423 2011

  62. [63]

    Impaired Efficiency of Functional Networks Underlying Episodic Memory-for-Context in Schizophrenia

    Wang L, Metzak PD, Honer WG, Woodward TS. Impaired Efficiency of Functional Networks Underlying Episodic Memory-for-Context in Schizophrenia. Journal of Neuroscience , 2010. 30(39):13171–13179. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3514-10.2010

    work page doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3514-10.2010 2010

  63. [64]

    Dynamic Reorganization of Functional Connectiv- ity Reveals Abnormal Temporal Efficiency in Schizophrenia

    Sun Y , Collinson SL, Suckling J, Sim K. Dynamic Reorganization of Functional Connectiv- ity Reveals Abnormal Temporal Efficiency in Schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2019. 45(3):659–669. doi:10.1093/schbul/sby077

    work page doi:10.1093/schbul/sby077 2019

  64. [65]

    Time-resolved resting-state brain networks

    Zalesky A, Fornito A, Cocchi L, Gollo LL, Breakspear M. Time-resolved resting-state brain networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2014. 111(28):10341–10346. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1400181111

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1400181111 2014

  65. [66]

    Prefrontal Brain Network Connectivity Indicates Degree of Both Schizophrenia Risk and Cognitive Dysfunction

    Unschuld PG, Buchholz AS, Varvaris M, van Zijl PCM, Ross CA, Pekar JJ, Hock C, Sweeney JA, Tamminga CA, Keshavan MS, Pearlson GD, Thaker GK, Schretlen DJ. Prefrontal Brain Network Connectivity Indicates Degree of Both Schizophrenia Risk and Cognitive Dysfunction. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 2014. 40(3):653–664. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbt077. 196 D. Coluzzi and G....

    work page doi:10.1093/schbul/sbt077 2014

  66. [67]

    Dynamic functional connectivity analysis reveals transient states of dysconnectivity in schizophrenia

    Damaraju E, Allen EA, Belger A, Ford JM, McEwen S, Mathalon D, Mueller B, Pearlson G, Potkin S, Preda A, et al. Dynamic functional connectivity analysis reveals transient states of dysconnectivity in schizophrenia. NeuroImage: Clinical, 2014. 5:298–308. doi:10.1016/j.nicl. 2014.07.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nicl 2014

  67. [68]

    Is removal of weak connections nec- essary for graph-theoretical analysis of dense weighted structural connectomes from diffusion MRI? NeuroImage, 2019

    Civier O, Smith RE, Yeh CH, Connelly A, Calamante F. Is removal of weak connections nec- essary for graph-theoretical analysis of dense weighted structural connectomes from diffusion MRI? NeuroImage, 2019. 194:68–81. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.02.039

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.02.039 2019

  68. [69]

    Mapping the Structural Core of Human Cerebral Cortex

    Hagmann P, Cammoun L, Gigandet X, Meuli R, Honey CJ, Wedeen VJ, Sporns O. Mapping the Structural Core of Human Cerebral Cortex. PLOS Biology, 2008. 6(7):e159. doi:10.1371/ journal.pbio.0060159

    work page 2008

  69. [71]

    Altered resting state complexity in schizophrenia

    Bassett DS, Nelson BG, Mueller BA, Camchong J, Lim KO. Altered resting state complexity in schizophrenia. NeuroImage, 2012. 59(3):2196–2207. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.10.002 2012

  70. [72]

    Perceptual and Cognitive Abnormalities as the Bases for Schizophrenic Symp- toms

    Hemsley DR. Perceptual and Cognitive Abnormalities as the Bases for Schizophrenic Symp- toms. In: The Neuropsychology Of Schizophrenia. Psychology Press. ISBN 978-1-315-78500-4,

    work page

  71. [73]

    Association between Functional Connectivity Hubs and Brain Networks

    Tomasi D, V olkow ND. Association between Functional Connectivity Hubs and Brain Networks. Cerebral Cortex, 2011. 21(9):2003–2013. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhq268

    work page doi:10.1093/cercor/bhq268 2011

  72. [74]

    Functional and anatomical connectivity ab- normalities in left inferior frontal gyrus in schizophrenia

    Jeong B, Wible CG, Hashimoto RI, Kubicki M. Functional and anatomical connectivity ab- normalities in left inferior frontal gyrus in schizophrenia. Human Brain Mapping , 2009. 30(12):4138–4151. doi:10.1002/hbm.20835

    work page doi:10.1002/hbm.20835 2009

  73. [75]

    Default mode network can support the level of detail in experience during active task states

    Sormaz M, Murphy C, Wang Ht, Hymers M, Karapanagiotidis T, Poerio G, Margulies DS, Jef- feries E, Smallwood J. Default mode network can support the level of detail in experience during active task states. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of Amer- ica, 2018. 115(37):9318–9323. doi:10.1073/pnas.1721259115

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1721259115 2018

  74. [76]

    Functional connectivity of left Heschl’s gyrus in vulnerability to auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia

    Shinn AK, Baker JT, Cohen BM, ¨Ong¨ur D. Functional connectivity of left Heschl’s gyrus in vulnerability to auditory hallucinations in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 2013. 143(2):260–268. doi:10.1016/j.schres.2012.11.037

    work page doi:10.1016/j.schres.2012.11.037 2013

  75. [77]

    Neurophysiologic Characterization of Resting State Connectivity Abnormalities in Schizophrenia Patients

    Koshiyama D, Miyakoshi M, Tanaka-Koshiyama K, Joshi YB, Molina JL, Sprock J, Braff DL, Light GA. Neurophysiologic Characterization of Resting State Connectivity Abnormalities in Schizophrenia Patients. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 2020. 11. URL https://www.frontiersin. org/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.608154. D. Coluzzi and G. Baselli / Diffuse and Localized F...

    work page doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.608154 2020

  76. [78]

    Subcortical neural tracks play an important role in executive function in schizophrenia: An experimental study among patients with schizophrenia and healthy comparisons

    Peskin N, Koren D, Gabay S. Subcortical neural tracks play an important role in executive function in schizophrenia: An experimental study among patients with schizophrenia and healthy comparisons. Schizophrenia Research: Cognition, 2020. 22:100185. doi:10.1016/j.scog.2020. 100185

    work page doi:10.1016/j.scog.2020 2020

  77. [79]

    Evidence of reduced ‘cognitive inhibition’ in schizophrenia

    Beech A, Powell T, McWilliam J, Claridge G. Evidence of reduced ‘cognitive inhibition’ in schizophrenia. British Journal of Clinical Psychology , 1989. 28(2):109–116. doi:10.1111/j. 2044-8260.1989.tb00821.x

    work page doi:10.1111/j 1989

  78. [80]

    Henseler I, Falkai P, Gruber O. Disturbed functional connectivity within brain networks sub- serving domain-specific subcomponents of working memory in schizophrenia: Relation to per- formance and clinical symptoms. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 2010. 44(6):364–372. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2009.09.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2009.09.003 2010

  79. [81]

    Dysfunctional Cortical Connectivity During the Auditory Oddball Task in Patients with Schizophrenia

    Fujimoto T, Okumura E, Takeuchi K, Kodabashi A, Otsubo T, Nakamura K, Kamiya S, Higashi Y , Yuji T, Honda K, Shimooki S, Tamura T. Dysfunctional Cortical Connectivity During the Auditory Oddball Task in Patients with Schizophrenia. The Open Neuroimaging Journal, 2013. 7:15–26. doi:10.2174/1874440001307010015

    work page doi:10.2174/1874440001307010015 2013

  80. [82]

    Parietal Lobes in Schizophrenia: Do They Matter? Schizophrenia Research and Treatment, 2011

    Yildiz M, Borgwardt SJ, Berger GE. Parietal Lobes in Schizophrenia: Do They Matter? Schizophrenia Research and Treatment, 2011. 2011:e581686. doi:10.1155/2011/581686

    work page doi:10.1155/2011/581686 2011

Showing first 80 references.