Volume 18, Issue 3 (2026)

Influence of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data Preprocessing Pipelines on the Accuracy of Schizophrenia Classification Using Machine Learning Methods
Influence of Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Data Preprocessing Pipelines on the Accuracy of Schizophrenia Classification Using Machine Learning Methods

Key words: schizophrenia classification; data preprocessing; fMRI; machine learning methods.

2026, Volume 18, Issue 3, page 14
Full text of the article: HTML PDF
173
86
  • Abstract
  • References
  • How to cite

The aim of the study was to analyze the influence of various pipelines for preprocessing raw functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data on the accuracy of classification of subjects into schizophrenia patients and healthy controls using machine learning methods, and to give recommendations for optimizing the data preprocessing pipeline for this task.

Materials and Methods. The study used fMRI data from 72 subjects acquired on a Siemens Magnetom Verio 3T MRI scanner (Siemens Healthineers, Germany) at the National Research Centre “Kurchatov Institute”. Seven different preprocessing pipelines were used on each dataset. Feature vectors for classification were constructed from each preprocessed dataset. We applied the following three algorithms for feature vector construction: ReHo, FCM, and FHR. Classification was performed using 15 machine learning methods from the scikit-learn package for each feature set and each preprocessing pipeline. The final accuracy was determined as the maximum accuracy among all machine learning methods.

Results. No single optimal preprocessing pipeline for all feature vector construction algorithms was found. Smoothing increased accuracy for the voxel metrics ReHo and FHR, but not for the regional metric FCM. Spatial smoothing was the only preprocessing step that affected classification accuracy for the FHR method. The FHR feature set without smoothing demonstrated accuracy close to chance level. The steps of frequency filtering and median normalization substantially increased the accuracy for both the ReHo and FCM methods, both with and without smoothing. The steps of inhomogeneity correction and slice timing correction did not increase accuracy for the FCM feature set but did improve it by several percent for the ReHo feature set. Application of ICA filtering changed accuracy within a range of 5%, in either a positive or negative direction.

Conclusion. Based on the obtained results, the following recommendations can be given for fMRI data preprocessing pipelines for binary classification of subjects into schizophrenia patients and healthy controls using machine learning methods and taking into account the feature vector construction algorithm. The most suitable for the ReHo metric pipeline includes motion correction, normalization, inhomogeneity correction, slice timing correction, frequency filtering, median normalization, and spatial smoothing. The most suitable for the FCM metric pipeline includes motion correction, normalization, inhomogeneity correction, slice timing correction, frequency filtering, and median normalization. Spatial smoothing is the most important factor for the FHR metric. The ICA filtering step does not provide a clear benefit and should therefore be applied with caution.

  1. Vergara V.M., Mayer A.R., Damaraju E., Hutchison K., Calhoun V.D. The effect of preprocessing pipelines in subject classification and detection of abnormal resting state functional network connectivity using group ICA. Neuroimage 2017; 145(Pt B): 365–376, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.03.038.
  2. González-Vivas C., García-Martí G., Soldevila-Matías P., Sanz-Requena R., Aguilar E.J., Castro-Bleda M.J., Martí-Bonmatí L., Sanjuan J. First-episode psychotic patients showed longitudinal brain changes using fMRI with an emotional auditory paradigm. Front Psychiatry 2020; 11: 593042, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.593042.
  3. Guggenmos M., Schmack K., Veer I.M., Lett T., Sekutowicz M., Sebold M., Garbusow M., Sommer C., Wittchen H.U., Zimmermann U.S., Smolka M.N., Walter H., Heinz A., Sterzer P. A multimodal neuroimaging classifier for alcohol dependence. Sci Rep 2020; 10(1): 298, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56923-9.
  4. Al-Zubaidi A., Mertins A., Heldmann M., Jauch-Chara K., Münte T.F. Machine learning based classification of resting-state fMRI features exemplified by metabolic state (hunger/satiety). Front Hum Neurosci 2019; 13: 164, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00164.
  5. Moghimi P., Lim K.O., Netoff T.I. Data driven classification using fMRI network measures: application to schizophrenia. Front Neuroinform 2018; 12: 71, https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00071.
  6. Zhu W., Wang Z., Yu M., Zhang X., Zhang Z. Using support vector machine to explore the difference of function connection between deficit and non-deficit schizophrenia based on gray matter volume. Front Neurosci 2023; 17: 1132607, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2023.1132607.
  7. Salvador R., Canales-Rodríguez E., Guerrero-Pedraza A., Sarró S., Tordesillas-Gutiérrez D., Maristany T., Crespo-Facorro B., McKenna P., Pomarol-Clotet E. Multimodal integration of brain images for MRI-based diagnosis in schizophrenia. Front Neurosci 2019; 13: 1203, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2019.01203.
  8. Gargouri F., Kallel F., Delphine S., Ben Hamida A., Lehéricy S., Valabregue R. The influence of preprocessing steps on graph theory measures derived from resting state fMRI. Front Comput Neurosci 2018; 12: 8, https://doi.org/10.3389/fncom.2018.00008.
  9. Candemir C. Spatial smoothing effect on group-level functional connectivity during resting and task-based fMRI. Sensors (Basel) 2023; 23(13): 5866, https://doi.org/10.3390/s23135866.
  10. Sotero R.C., Sanchez-Bornot J.M., Shaharabi-Farahani I., Iturria-Medina Y. Examining the impact of fMRI preprocessing steps on machine learning-based classification of autism spectrum disorder. In: 2023 the 7th International Conference on Medical and Health Informatics (ICMHI). New York; 2023; p. 19–24, https://doi.org/10.1145/3608298.3608302.
  11. Triana A.M., Glerean E., Saramäki J., Korhonen O. Effects of spatial smoothing on group-level differences in functional brain networks. Netw Neurosci 2020; 4(3): 556–574, https://doi.org/10.1162/netn_a_00132.
  12. Zalesky A., Fornito A., Bullmore E.T. Network-based statistic: identifying differences in brain networks. Neuroimage 2010; 53(4): 1197–1207, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.06.041.
  13. Borchardt V., Lord A.R., Li M., van der Meer J., Heinze H.J., Bogerts B., Breakspear M., Walter M. Preprocessing strategy influences graph-based exploration of altered functional networks in major depression. Hum Brain Mapp 2016; 37(4): 1422–1442, https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.23111.
  14. Zang Y., Jiang T., Lu Y., He Y., Tian L. Regional homogeneity approach to fMRI data analysis. Neuroimage 2004; 22(1): 394–400, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.12.030.
  15. Blinowska K.J. Review of the methods of determination of directed connectivity from multichannel data. Med Biol Eng Comput 2011; 49(5): 521–529, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-011-0739-x.
  16. Kozlov S., Poyda A., Orlov V., Sharaev M., Ushakov V. Selection of functionally homogeneous human brain regions for functional connectomes building based on fMRI data. In: Velichkovsky B.M., Balaban P.M., Ushakov V.L. (editors). Advances in Cognitive Research, Artificial Intelligence and Neuroinformatics. Intercognsci 2020. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1358. Springer, Cham; 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-71637-0_82.
  17. Strother S.C. Evaluating fMRI preprocessing pipelines. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag 2006; 25(2): 27–41, https://doi.org/10.1109/memb.2006.1607667.
  18. Eklund A., Dufort P., Villani M., Laconte S. BROCCOLI: software for fast fMRI analysis on many-core CPUs and GPUs. Front Neuroinform 2014; 8: 24, https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2014.00024.
  19. Ashburner J., Barnes G., Chen C.-C., Daunizeau J., Flandin G., Friston K., Gitelman D., Glauche V., Henson R., Hutton C., Jafarian A., Kiebel S., Kilner J., Litvak V., Mattout J., Moran R., Penny W., Phillips C., Razi A., Stephan K., Tak S., Tyrer A., Zeidman P. SPM12 manual. URL: https://www.fil.ion.ucl.ac.uk/spm/doc/spm12_manual.pdf.
  20. Friston K.J., Williams S., Howard R., Frackowiak R.S., Turner R. Movement-related effects in fMRI time-series. Magn Reson Med 1996; 35(3): 346–355. https://doi.org/10.1002/mrm.1910350312.
  21. Frost M.A., Goebel R. Measuring structural-functional correspondence: spatial variability of specialised brain regions after macro-anatomical alignment. Neuroimage 2012; 59(2): 1369–1381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.035.
  22. Whitfield-Gabrieli S., Nieto-Castanon A. CONN: a functional connectivity toolbox for correlated and anticorrelated brain networks. Brain Connect 2012; 2(3): 125–141, https://doi.org/10.1089/brain.2012.0073.
  23. Togo H., Rokicki J., Yoshinaga K., Hisatsune T., Matsuda H., Haga N., Hanakawa T. Effects of field-map distortion correction on resting state functional connectivity MRI. Front Neurosci 2017; 11: 656, https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2017.00656.
  24. Beckmann C.F., Smith S.M. Probabilistic independent component analysis for functional magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2004; 23(2): 137–152, https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2003.822821.
  25. Xu K., Liu Y., Zhan Y., Ren J., Jiang T. BRANT: a versatile and extendable resting-state fMRI toolkit. Front Neuroinform 2018; 12: 52, https://doi.org/10.3389/fninf.2018.00052.
  26. Kozlov S.O. Kartirovanie funktsional'noy aktivnosti golovnogo mozga cheloveka s uchetom urovnya sinkhronizatsii vokseley po dannym fMRT. Diss. ... kand. fiz.-mat. nauk [Mapping functional activity of the human brain based on the level of voxel synchronization using fMRI data. PhD Dissertation]. Moscow; 2025; 129 p.
  27. GitHub, Inc. KozlovStanislav/CCM-FOR. Korrelya­tsionno-klasternye metody vydeleniya funktsional'no-odnorodnykh regionov golovnogo mozga [Selection of functionally homogeneous brain regions based on correlation-clustering analysis]. URL: https://github.com/KozlovStanislav/CCM-FOR.
  28. Zhemchuzhnikov A.D., Kartashov S.I., Kozlov S.O., Orlov V.A., Poyda A.A., Zakharova N.V., Bravve L.V., Mamedova G.S., Kaydan M.A. On most informative regions for binary classification of schizophrenia based on resting state fMRI data done by selection of functionally homogeneous regions method. I.P. Pavlov Journal of Higher Nervous Activity 2024; 74(4): 412–425, https://doi.org/10.31857/S0044467724040035.
  29. Pedregosa F., Varoquaux G., Gramfort A., Michel  V., Thirion B., Grisel O., Blondel M., Prettenhofer P., Weiss  R., Dubourg V., Vanderplas J., Passos A., Cournapeau D., Brucher M., Perrot M., Duchesnay É. Scikit-learn: machine learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 2011; 12: 2825–2830.
  30. Arlot S., Celisse A. A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection. Statistics Surveys 2010; 4, https://doi.org/10.1214/09-ss054.
  31. Cai X.L., Xie D.J., Madsen K.H., Wang Y.M., Bögemann S.A., Cheung E.F.C., Møller A., Chan R.C.K. Generalizability of machine learning for classification of schizophrenia based on resting-state functional MRI data. Hum Brain Mapp 2020; 41(1): 172–184, https://doi.org/10.1002/hbm.24797.
Poyda A.A., Orlov V.A., Zhemchuzhnikov A.D., Kozlov S.O., Kartashov S.I., Bravve L.V., Kaydan M.A., Kostyuk G.P. Influence of functional magnetic resonance imaging data preprocessing pipelines on the accuracy of schizophrenia classification using machine learning methods. Sovremennye tehnologii v medicine 2026; 18(3): 14, https://doi.org/10.17691/stm2026.18.3.02