ReviewFrontiers in neuroscience2025
A short investigation of the effect of the selection of human brain atlases on the performance of ASD's classification models.
Review in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Artificial intelligence support for diagnosis of neurodevelopmental disorders during childhood: an umbrella review.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Cerebral Small Vessel Disease-Related Depression: From Visual Scoring to Artificial Intelligence.CNS neuroscience & therapeutics · 2026Review
- Benchmarking resting state fMRI connectivity pipelines for classification: robust accuracy despite processing variability in cross-site eye state prediction.Brain informatics · 2026Article
- Dynamic functional reorganization in post-stroke aphasia: a state-of-the-art fMRI review from disease evolution to intervention.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the impact of brain atlas selection on the classification accuracy of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) models using functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) data. Brain atlases, such as AAL, CC200, Harvard-Oxford, and Yeo 7/17, are used to define regions of interest (ROIs) for fMRI analysis and play a crucial role in enabling researchers to study connectivity patterns and neural dynamics in ASD patients. Through a systematic review, we examined the performance of different atlases in various machine-learning and deep-learning frameworks for ASD classification. The results reveal that atlas selection significantly affects classification accuracy, with denser atlases, such as CC400, providing higher granularity, whereas coarser atlases such as AAL, offer computational efficiency. Furthermore, we discuss the dynamics of combining multiple atlases to enhance feature extraction and explore the implications of atlas selection across diverse datasets. Our findings emphasize the need for standardized approaches to atlas selection and highlight future research directions, including the integration of novel atlases, advanced data augmentation techniques, and end-to-end deep-learning models. This study provides valuable insights into optimizing fMRI-based ASD diagnosis and underscores the importance of interpreting atlas-specific features for an improved understanding of brain connectivity in ASD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.