Fig. 1: Cortical functional network topology analyses between PD and HCs.

A–C Difference of global parameters between PD and HCs. Violin chart in which dotted lines represent the median and quartile, respectively. No significant difference was found in Sigmma, Eg, or Eloc between PD and HCs. D, E Difference of Ne values in the CH32 and CH40 between PD and HCs. Violin chart in which dotted lines represent the median and quartile, respectively. PD patients had significantly lower Ne values in the CH32 and higher Ne values in the CH40 than HCs. F p value diagram. The brain regions labeled with cold colors represent the more significant difference between groups. The Ne of the right primary motor cortex (CH32), left pre‐motor area, and supplementary motor area (CH40) in the PD patients were significantly different from those in the HCs. The statistical threshold was set at p < 0.05 (Bonferroni corrected). G Correlations between Ne values in the CH32 values and UPDRS-III scores in PD patients. Scatterplots demonstrated that there was a significant negative correlation between the Ne values in the CH32 and UPDRS-III scores in PD patients. H Correlations between Ne values in the CH40 and UPDRS-III scores in the PD patients. Scatterplots demonstrated that there was significant no correlation between the Ne values in the CH40 and UPDRS-III scores in PD patients. PD Parkinson’s disease, HCs healthy controls, Ne area under the curve of the nodal efficiency, Sigma area under the curve of the small-worldness, Eg area under the curve of the global efficiency, Eloc, area under the curve of the local efficiency, CH channel, UPDRS Unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale. ***p < 0.001, ****p < 0.0001.