Benchmarking fMRI Denoising Pipelines.

Overview

1. Neuroimaging Research Branch, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Drug Abuse, National Institutes of Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
2. Department of Psychiatry, Harvard University Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA

Abstract

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is a powerful tool for probing neuronal activity in vivo, but fMRI data are inherently noisy. To mitigate this, a wide range of denoising strategies have been developed, including volume censoring, anatomical component‐based noise correction (aCompCor), ICA‐based methods (e.g., AROMA, FIX), and multi‐echo approaches (e.g., ME‐ICA, tedana). These techniques are often applied in different combinations and have been predominantly evaluated on single‐echo resting‐state fMRI data—typically without incorporating more recent methodological advances known to improve modeling, such as order‐independent “1‐step regression”, modeling temporal autocorrelation (pre‐whitening), and temporal shifting of physiological nuisance regressors. To fill this gap, we used a framework that incorporates these methods and benchmarked a range of denoising pipelines across task and resting‐state, single‐ and multi‐band, and single‐ and multi‐echo fMRI datasets, using different combinations of standard denoising confounds. Pipeline performance was evaluated using temporal signal‐to‐noise ratio (tSNR) and percentage remaining degrees‐of‐freedom (DoF), effectiveness of motion correction, and effectiveness of signal preservation. While pipelines only using ICA were insufficient, those that incorporated physiological nuisance regressors performed well. Additional improvements were observed when temporally shifted physiological regressors were accounted for. Based on these results, we provide recommendations for selecting denoising pipelines and emphasize the need for continued benchmarking as new methods are developed or applied in novel contexts.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Code

The paper says that its authors' code is available on request: it was not published with the paper, so there is nothing to verify.

The paper's code and data availability statement is in the Data section.

Tracing map

A tracing map links a paper to the code its authors published: this paper has none (its code is available on request), so it has no map.

Data

No dataset and no data link were found in the paper.

Data Availability Statement

The data used in this study are subject to the following licenses/restrictions: Raw data of Cohort A, B, and C, as well as codes and derived data supporting the findings of this study, are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and contingent on institutional approval. Raw data of Cohort D are from the publicly available Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) dataset.

Reproduced under the paper's license (CC BY), from the paper cited above.

Versions

The history of this record: each version stored by the harvester or made by a correction of its authors or of the maintainers of its code, and what changed in its facts. The texts of the paper (its abstract, its availability statements) are not part of it; versions that changed only those are not listed.

Version 1, 27 September 2026: the first record

Recorded: type, language, journal, volume, issue, pages, dates, 8 authors, 5 keywords, 8 MeSH terms, 2 funders, 63 references.

Cite

This paper

Zhai, T., Gu, H., Holton, A., Chang, E., Frederick, B. B., Ross, T. J., Yang, Y., & Janes, A. C. (2026). Benchmarking fMRI Denoising Pipelines. Human brain mapping, 47(10), e70561. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.70561

Similar papers

The papers with a page that share the most with this one: the tools found in their code, their categories, datasets, cited references and authors, the rarest counting most.

[1] doi:10.1162/netn.a.547 [code]

An evaluation of the efficacy of single-echo and multi-echo fMRI denoising strategies.

Journal: Network neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, 12 references

[2] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1198 [code]

MEPrep: A robust pipeline for multi-echo fMRI denoising and preprocessing.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: fMRI, methods / tools, 10 references

[3] doi:10.1162/imag.a.1191

Robust functional ultrasound imaging in the awake and behaving brain: A systematic framework for motion artifact removal.

Journal: Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)

In common: methods / tools, 10 references

[4] doi:10.1093/brain/awaf443 [code]

Cellular signatures underlying functional resilience in presymptomatic frontotemporal dementia.

Journal: Brain : a journal of neurology

In common: fMRI, 8 references

[5] doi:10.1186/s40708-026-00305-1 [code]

Benchmarking resting state fMRI connectivity pipelines for classification: robust accuracy despite processing variability in cross-site eye state prediction.

Journal: Brain informatics

In common: fMRI, methods / tools, 6 references

[6] doi:10.1093/braincomms/fcag151

Brain function in language and associated networks in non- or minimally verbal children.

Journal: Brain communications

In common: fMRI, 6 references

[7] doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-9326213/v1 [code]

Multi-task fMRI outperforms resting-state fMRI for revealing task-invariant organization of the human brain

Journal: Research Square (preprint)

In common: fMRI, 6 references

[8] doi:10.1038/s41467-026-75585-6 [code]

Brain network dynamics reflect psychiatric illness status and transdiagnostic symptom profiles across health and disease.

Journal: Nature communications

In common: 6 references

[9] doi:10.1002/hbm.70496 [code]

Transdiagnostic Profiles of BOLD Signal Variability in Autism and Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: Associations With Cognition and Functioning.

Journal: Human brain mapping

In common: fMRI, 5 references

[10] doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2026.122186

Aging, brain network connectivity, and cognition: evidence from resting-state dynamic arterial spin labeling.

Journal: NeuroImage

In common: fMRI, 4 references

Contribute

The authors of this paper can claim it, correct its record and validate its tracing map, and the maintainers of its code (its owner, or a public member of its organization) correct what it says of their repository; anyone signed in can ask for its removal. Every request goes to OSCR's own machine, which answers it; your account page follows them.

Request its removal

To ask OSCR to remove this record, the copies of its authors' scripts or its tracing map, use the removal request page: signed in, you say who you are, what to remove and why, then review and confirm the request. Published rules decide every request (how).

Discussion: questions and error reports about this paper and its code, from signed-in readers and its authors. It opens with sign-in.

Reproductions: reports from readers who ran the authors' code: what they reproduced, with which environment, commit and data. It opens with sign-in.

Activity: what happens around this paper: new versions of its record, its map's validation, discussions and reproductions. It opens with sign-in.