. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 May 19.

Published in final edited form as: J Alzheimers Dis. 2016 Oct 4;54(3):1095–1112. doi: 10.3233/JAD-160092

Table 4.

Group differences in edge centrality for HOFC/FC networks

#	HOFC^**		p	t	Direction^*	#	FC^***		p	t	Direction^*
#	Region A	Region B	p	t	Direction^*	#	Region A	Region B	p	t	Direction^*
1	PostCG.R	PreCG.R	0.046	2.010	↑	1	PostCG.R	PreCG.R	0.017	2.403	↑
2	Calc.L	Ling.L	0.039	2.081	↑	2	Calc.L	Ling.L	0.024	2.285	↑
3	SOG.L	Cun.R	0.012	2.545	↑	3	Calc.L	Calc.R	0.025	2.257	↑
4	SOG.L	SOG.R	0.043	2.042	↑	4	Calc.L	Ling.R	0.038	2.094	↑
5	SOG.R	MOG.R	0.041	2.064	↑	5	Put.L	Put.R	0.029	2.203	↑
6	STG.L	ROLoper.L	0.028	2.226	↑	6	STG.R	ROLoper.R	0.013	2.518	↑
						7	OLF.L	OLF.R	0.003	−3.077	↓↓
						8	MOG.L	MOG.R	0.018	2.391	↑

↑indicates increased edge centrality between regions A and B in MCIs compared with CONs with p < 0.05; ↓↓indicates decreased edge centrality in MCIs compared with CONs with p < 0.01;

^**

Group differences were found for 20 HOFC edges that both group have > 80% subjects with non-zero edge centrality values;

^***

Group differences were found for 42 FC edges that both group have > 80% subjects with non-zero edge centrality values. The shaded results indicate the same edges with group difference in both HOFC and FC. For abbreviations of the brain regions listed above please see Supplementary Material 1.