Table 2 Results on network-wise Resting State Functional Connectivity (RSFC).

From: Multimodal investigation of the association between shift work and the brain in a population-based sample of older adults

Compared to

RANDOM

MATCHED

Linear regression of shift work years

Sign (%)

Mean rank MATCHED/PRESENT

Effect size r

ß

CI lower; CI upper

p

η2

PRESENT shift workers

VN within

7.1

10.62/16.38; p = .057

.38

.31

− .32; .94

.290

.14

SMN within

9.5

13.62/13.38; p = .960

− .02

.19

− .58; .96

.586

.04

DAN within

5.9

12.23/14.77; p = .418

.17

− .44

− 1.18; .31

.213

.19

VAN within

6.5

14.85/12.15; p = .390

− .18

.17

− .62; .97

.628

.03

LIMN within

8.5

14.15/12.85; p = .687

− .09

− .19

− .88; .51

.558

.05

FPN within

8.6

16.65/10.35; p = .034

− .41

.06

− .70; .81

.871

.00

DMN within

5.0

15.08/11.92; p = .311

− .21

− .22

− 1.10; .67

.587

.04

VN inter

6.9

13.69/13.31; p = .920

− .03

− .53

− 1.28; .21

.138

.25

SMN inter

7.3

13.54/13.46; p = 1.000*

− .01

− .36

− 1.09; .36

.281

.14

DAN inter

5.0

14.00/13.00; p = .762

− .07

− .40

− 1.28; .48

.329

.12

VAN inter

7.1

15.69/11.31; p = .153

− .29

− .54

− 1.31; .24

.149

.24

LIMN inter

7.4

13.15/13.85; p = .840

.05

− .50

− 1.15; .16

.119

.28

FPN inter

8.4

15.38/11.62; p = .223

− .25

− .32

− 1.06; .43

.361

.11

DMN inter

4.8

13.62/13.38; p = .960

− .02

− .37

− 1.22; .49

.350

.11

VN Ratio

6.2

10.46/16.54; p =.044

.40

.63

.26; 1.01

.005

.65

SMN Ratio

5.8

13.77/13.23; p = .880

− .04

.30

− .47; 1.08

.390

.09

DAN Ratio

5.9

11.15/15.85; p = .125

.31

− .09

− .86; .69

.799

.01

VAN Ratio

5.6

13.77/13.23; p = .880

− .04

.40

− .46; 1.26

.312

.13

LIMN Ratio

6.7

14.08/12.92; p = .724

− .08

.22

− .49; .93

.496

.06

FPN Ratio

6.2

15.23/11.77; p = .264

− .23

.21

− .45; .87

.486

.06

DMN Ratio

6.5

14.15/12.85; p = .687

− .09

.14

− .82; 1.10

.748

.01

FORMER shift workers

VN within

3.3

93.14/83.97; p = .232

− 0.09

.002

− .001; .005

.163

.023

SMN within

3.4

94.80/82.34; p = .105

− 0.12

.001

− .001; .004

.246

.016

DAN within

2.8

93.25/83.85; p = .221

− 0.09

.000

− .001; .002

.544

.004

VAN within

4.1

87.83/89.16; p = .863

0.01

− .001

− .002; .002

.978

.001

LIMN within

7.4

87.66/89.33; p = .828

0.02

.000

− .002; .001

.462

.006

FPN within

3.6

94.26/82.87; p = .138

− 0.11

.001

− .001; .002

.519

.005

DMN within

6.8

92.57/84.52; p = .294

− 0.08

.000

.000; .002

.226

.017

VN inter

5.0

97.68/79.53; p = .018

− 0.18

.000

− .001; .001

.938

.001

SMN inter

6.0

95.20/81.96; p = .085

− 0.13

.000

− .001; .001

.799

.001

DAN inter

3.0

95.22/81.93; p = .084

− 0.13

.000

.000; .001

.596

.003

VAN inter

5.7

92.54/84.55; p = .298

− 0.08

.000

− .001; .000

.311

.012

LIMN inter

4.0

95.92/81.25; p = .056

− 0.14

.000

− .001; .000

.834

.001

FPN inter

6.3

93.03/84.07; p = .243

− 0.09

.000

− .001; .000

.514

.005

DMN inter

5.2

94.99/82.16; p = .095

− 0.13

.002

− .001; .000

.683

.002

VN Ratio

5.3

86.85/90.11; p = .671

0.03

.002

− .001; .005

.281

.014

SMN Ratio

3.4

89.90/87.13; p = .719

− 0.03

.002

− .000; .005

.055

.043

DAN Ratio

4.1

89.01/88.00; p = .895

-0.01

.001

− .002; .003

.575

.004

VAN Ratio

4.1

84.53/92.38; p = .307

0.08

.001

− .001; .003

.307

.012

LIMN Ratio

5.1

86.30/90.65; p = .571

0.04

− .001

− .004; .002

.560

.004

FPN Ratio

2.9

91.26/85.80; p = .477

− 0.05

.002

− .001; .004

.195

.002

DMN Ratio

6.4

88.49/88.51; p = .999

0.00

.002

− .001; .004

.197

.020

  1. Sign. = Percentage of tests that showed a significance of p < 0.05 when comparing PRESENT or FORMER shift workers with 1000 samples of RANDOM controls. * indicates an asymptotic significance. CI = 95% confidence interval.