Table 2.
Summary of the global and nodal network results.
| Measure | Healthy controls vs. Typical AD | Healthy controls vs. Limbic-predominant | Healthy controls vs. Hippocampal-sparing | Healthy controls vs. Minimal atrophy AD |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (A) GLOBAL MEASURES | ||||
| Transitivity | ↓ | – | ↓ | – |
| Modularity | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ |
| Average global efficiency | – | – | – | – |
| Average local efficiency | – | – | ↑ | ↑ |
| (B) NODAL MEASURES | ||||
| Nodal global efficiency | ||||
| Two-tailed t-test | ↑ 5 regions ↓ 1 region |
– | – | – |
| One-tailed t-test | ↑ 10 regions ↓ 3 regions |
↑ 2 regions ↓ 1 region |
↑ 3 regions | ↑ 9 regions |
| Nodal local efficiency | ||||
| Two-tailed t-test | ↑ 3 regions ↓ 1 region |
↓ 2 regions | – | – |
Results were considered significant when p ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed). Since trends to significant differences were observed in nodal measures in both hippocampal-sparing and minimal atrophy AD, FDR-corrected one-tailed t-tests were conducted showing significant results in nodal global efficiency (displayed in the table). The one-tailed t-tests were also conducted for typical and limbic-predominant AD, and the results are displayed in the table for completeness of information. AD, Alzheimer's disease; ↑, higher values in AD patients; ↓, lower values in AD patients; −, non-significant results.