Table 2 Significant interaction effect, between-group and within-group differences in ReHo-seed (vmPFC) functional connectivity analyses.
From: Dynamic Changes of Functional Pain Connectome in Women with Primary Dysmenorrhea
Contrast | Region | BA | Size | t score | Coordinate | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
x | y | z | |||||
left side ReHo-seed (−6, 50, 4) | |||||||
Interaction | |||||||
 PDMΔ(MENS-POV) > CONΔ(MENS-POV) | SMA/MCC | 6 | 539 | 3.95 | 2 | −6 | 50 |
Between-group planned contrast | |||||||
 MENS: PDM > CON | SFG | 6 | 388 | 3.97 | −14 | 24 | 58 |
dmPFC | 9 | 384 | 3.94 | −10 | 48 | 28 | |
 MENS: CON > PDM | dACC | 32 | 374 | 4.2 | 2 | 20 | 32 |
 POV: PDM > CON | dmPFC/DLPFC | 8 | 952 | 4.24 | −12 | 30 | 40 |
VPL/angular | 39 | 372 | 3.85 | −42 | −68 | 48 | |
 POV: CON > PDM | pACC | 24 | 823 | 4.28 | 0 | 38 | 10 |
2 | 22 | 28# | |||||
Between-phase planned contrast | |||||||
 CON: POV > MENS | SMA | 6 | 580 | 4.46 | −12 | −12 | 54 |
right side ReHo-seed (6, 62, 22) | |||||||
Between-group planned contrast | |||||||
 POV: CON > PDM | IFG | – | 335 | 5.06 | 46 | 20 | 6 |
pACC | 32 | 691 | 3.99 | 4 | 40 | 8 | |
Between-phase planned contrast | |||||||
 PDM: POV > MENS | pons | – | 325 | 4.58 | 12 | −38 | −34 |