Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 801

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An evaluation of the efficacy, reliability, and sensitivity of motion correction strategies for resting-state functional MRI

Open access
Parkes, Linden, Fulcher, Ben, Yücel, Murat, Fornito, Alex·2018·NeuroImage

Abstract

Estimates of functional connectivity derived from resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI) are sensitive to artefacts caused by in-scanner head motion. This susceptibility has motivated the development of numerous denoising methods designed to mitigate motion-related artefacts. Here, we compare popular retrospective rs-fMRI denoising methods, such as regression of head motion parameters and mean white matter (WM) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) (with and without expansion terms), aCompCor, volume censoring (e.g., scrubbing and spike regression), global signal regression and ICA-AROMA, combined into 19 different pipelines. These pipelines were evaluated across five different quality control benchmarks in four independent datasets associated with varying levels of motion. Pipelines were benchmarked by examining the residual relationship between in-scanner movement and functional connectivity after denoising; the effect of distance on this residual relationship; whole-brain differences in functional connectivity between high- and low-motion healthy controls (HC); the temporal degrees of freedom lost during denoising; and the test-retest reliability of functional connectivity estimates. We also compared the sensitivity of each pipeline to clinical differences in functional connectivity in independent samples of people with schizophrenia and obsessive-compulsive disorder. Our results indicate that (1) simple linear regression of regional fMRI time series against head motion parameters and WM/CSF signals (with or without expansion terms) is not sufficient to remove head motion artefacts; (2) aCompCor pipelines may only be viable in low-motion data; (3) volume censoring performs well at minimising motion-related artefact but a major benefit of this approach derives from the exclusion of high-motion individuals; (4) while not as effective as volume censoring, ICA-AROMA performed well across our benchmarks for relatively low cost in terms of data loss; (5) the addition of global signal regression improved the performance of nearly all pipelines on most benchmarks, but exacerbated the distance-dependence of correlations between motion and functional connectivity; and (6) group comparisons in functional connectivity between healthy controls and schizophrenia patients are highly dependent on preprocessing strategy. We offer some recommendations for best practice and outline simple analyses to facilitate transparent reporting of the degree to which a given set of findings may be affected by motion-related artefact.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.073

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 63 references

Cited by

See all 801

Metadata

Authors
Parkes, L., Fulcher, B., Yücel, M., & Fornito, A.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-05
Volume
171
Pages
415-436
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2953090092
Cited by
801
References
63
FWCI
26.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: An evaluation of the efficacy, reliability, and sensitivity of motion correction strategies for resting-state functional MRI. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.073
The paper
Parkes, L., Fulcher, B., Yücel, M., & Fornito, A. (2018). An evaluation of the efficacy, reliability, and sensitivity of motion correction strategies for resting-state functional MRI. NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.073

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.