Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 15;2021:8846097. doi: 10.1155/2021/8846097

Table 2.

Independent component analysis results for depressed vs. controls comparison.

IC no. GM WM CSF Accepted Best match
1 0.07 -0.05 0.00 Yes Default mode network (r = 0.69)
2 0.11 -0.09 -0.03 Yes Right frontoparietal network (r = 0.69)
3 0.15 -0.19 0.17 No
4 0.06 -0.16 0.29 No
5 0.11 -0.07 -0.03 Yes Medial visual network (r = 0.82)
6 0.02 -0.02 0.01 No
7 0.00 -0.05 0.12 No
8 0.20 -0.19 0.02 Yes Audial network (r = 0.62)
9 0.08 -0.07 -0.02 Yes Left frontoparietal network (r = 0.76)
10 0.23 -0.20 -0.03 Yes Lateral visual network (r = 0.46), occipital pole (r = 0.40)
11 0.11 -0.11 0.05 Yes –/Stanford ventral DMN (r = 0.48)
12 0.14 -0.17 0.12 No
13 0.01 0.01 -0.02 Yes Executive control network (r = 0.62)/Stanford dorsal DMN (r = 0.43)
14 0.26 -0.25 0.11 No
15 -0.44 0.36 0.05 No
16 0.21 -0.21 0.06 Yes Default mode network (r = 0.57)
17 0.15 -0.19 0.07 Yes –/Stanford language network (r = 0.43)
18 -0.06 0.10 -0.08 No
19 0.09 -0.12 0.06 No
20 0.17 -0.17 0.09 Yes Cerebellum network (r = 0.37)

IC: independent component; GM: gray matter; WM: white matter; CSF: cerebro-spinal fluid; r: correlation coefficient; excluded for an artifact localization based on visual examination.