Skip to main content
. 2023 Jun 27;40(13-14):1339–1351. doi: 10.1089/neu.2022.0146

Table 3.

Static and Dynamic rs-FC Differences Between Choking and Choking-Naïve Participants

Analysis method ROI seeds Cluster location BA Peak (MNI)
Cluster size t
x y z
Static rs-FC Left angular gyrus Left Rolandic operculum 48 -48 -6 9 125 4.962
Left postcentral gyrus 3 -51 -18 39 315 5.386
Left postcentral gyrus 40 -33 -36 48 48 4.976
Left precentral gyrus 6 -33 -9 51 32 3.984
Right superior frontal gyrus 6 21 -12 63 12 5.197
Right postcentral gyrus 4 48 -12 39 321 5.111
Right postcentral gyrus 2 24 -39 66 58 4.536
Right angular gyrus Left angular gyrus 39 -39 -51 21 45 4.107
Left postcentral gyrus 40 -33 -36 51 248 4.097
Left insula 48 -48 6 6 221 4.469
Left middle temporal gyrus 21 -51 -33 -6 52 3.739
Left fusiform gyrus 37 -60 -63 -3 20 3.698
Right superior temporal gyrus 41 42 -33 12 21 4.015
Right superior temporal gyrus 42 54 -30 18 31 3.558
Right Rolandic operculum 48 48 -27 30 248 4.328
Right precuneus 5 12 -54 66 109 3.835
Right lingual gyrus 19 21 -57 -6 2096 4.463
Dynamic rs-FC Left angular gyrus Left postcentral gyrus 4 -60 -21 39 95 5.471
Right postcentral gyrus 3 36 -36 57 363 4.852
Right postcentral gyrus 1 30 -42 69 11 3.637

The multiple comparison correction was used with the threshold-free cluster enhancement (TFCE), which was tested at two-tailed p < .05; the number of permutations was set at 1,000. BA, Brodmann area; MNI, Montreal Neurological Institute; ROI, region of interest; rs-FC, resting-state functional connectivity.