Skip to main content
. 2022 Dec 1;14(23):5102. doi: 10.3390/nu14235102

Table 2.

Pair-wise statistical comparison of identified functional connections and BBB permeability for ROO and EVOO groups. Bold values indicate significantly different.

Functional Connection Pair-Wise p-Values
EVOO2 > EVOO1 ROO2 vs. ROO1 EVOO1 vs. ROO2 EVOO1 vs. ROO1 EVOO2 > ROO2
L Precuneus ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.02 0.46 0.83 0.66 0.01
R Precuneus ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.02 0.41 0.78 0.50 0.05
L Postcentral Gyrus ↔ R Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.03 0.93 0.80 0.77 0.04
L Postcentral Gyrus ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.05 0.76 0.98 0.80 0.04
R Postcentral Gyrus ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.05 0.31 0.50 0.91 0.01
L Lingual Gyrus ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.04 0.22 0.84 0.34 0.05
L Middle Frontal Gyrus ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.05 0.65 0.36 0.52 0.01
L Superior Parietal Lobule ↔ L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.04 0.06 0.52 0.35 0.01
BBB permeability
L Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.00 0.60 0.69 0.27 0.00
R Parahippocampal Gyrus 0.01 0.85 0.34 0.40 0.04
L Hippocampus 0.03 0.87 0.15 0.21 0.05
R Hippocampus 0.04 0.99 0.70 0.71 0.03

The baseline is presented as (1) and the 6-month is presented as (2). For example, EVOO1 corresponds to the EVOO group at baseline (session 1) and EVOO2 is after 6 months (session 2). Significant p-values (p ≤ 0.05 FDR corrected) are shown in boldface.