Blood Oxygen Level-Dependent Signal Variability Is More than Just Noise
Open accessAbstract
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) research often attributes blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) signal variance to measurement-related confounds. However, what is typically considered “noise” variance in data may be a vital feature of brain function. We examined fMRI signal variability during fixation baseline periods, and then compared SD- and mean-based spatial patterns and their relations with chronological age (20–85 years). We found that not only was the SD-based pattern robust, it differed greatly, both spatially and statistically, from the mean-based pattern. Notably, the unique age-predictive power of the SD-based pattern was more than five times that of the mean-based pattern. This reliable SD-based pattern of activity highlights an important “signal” within what is often considered measurement-related “noise.” We suggest that examination of BOLD signal variability may reveal a host of novel brain-related effects not previously considered in neuroimaging research.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
BOLD signal variability predicts age better than BOLD signal mean.
“blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) variability is a better predictor of age than BOLD mean59.”
From Cognitive and behavioural flexibility: Neural mechanisms and clinical considerations (2021) · cites this paper as [59]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 41 · Cited by 396
- Authors
- Garrett, D. D., Kovacevic, N., McIntosh, A. R., & Grady, C. L.
- Affiliations
- Rotman Research Institute (CA)
- Baycrest Hospital (CA)
- University of Toronto (CA)
- Venue
- The Journal of Neuroscience
- Publisher
- Society for Neuroscience
- Published
- 2010-04-06
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 14
- Pages
- 4914-4921
- ISSN
- 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
- 1529-2401
- PMC
- PMC6632804
- OpenAlex
- W1983927442
- Cited by
- 396
- References
- 41
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 27 · 2018: 33 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 31 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 18
- FWCI
- 14.81
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- James S. McDonnell Foundation (MOP14036)
- Canada Research Chairs
- Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest
- Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP14036, MOP13026)
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
- Keywords
- BOLD signal variability, brain aging
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Brain, Electricity, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult
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
