Strengthening a Resting-State fMRI Study for a Scopus Q2 Journal
A completed neurology and neuroscience consultation that improved neuroimaging quality control, statistical validity, clinical interpretation and the manuscript's contribution.
Anonymised composite:this case study illustrates our consultation process. Details are anonymised and combined from real engagements, and it should not be read as a verified individual client’s publication record. Our verified, named case studies are marked as such.
Where the client started
A neurology researcher was examining whether resting-state functional connectivity measured three months after stroke was associated with cognitive performance at six months. The draft contained clinically interesting connectivity findings.
The analysis behind them was unstable: head-motion exclusions were unclear, preprocessing was incompletely reported, numerous seed-to-region tests lacked correction and associations were described as validated predictors.
What we did
Exploratory association was separated from prognostic validation. The revised paper asked whether predefined network-connectivity measures were associated with later cognitive scores after accounting for clinical factors, no longer claiming a recovery mechanism or a clinically deployable prediction model from a single observational cohort.
Slice-timing and motion correction, normalisation, smoothing, nuisance regression, temporal filtering and software versions were reported. Framewise-displacement thresholds, censoring rules and image-exclusion criteria were defined, and motion differences between outcome groups were checked.
An established atlas and a priori network regions replaced seeds selected after viewing the strongest results. Primary contrasts were identified, false-discovery-rate correction was applied and remaining analyses were labelled as exploratory, with age, education, lesion volume and location, stroke severity and time since stroke considered without overfitting the available sample.
The client learned to report participant flow and scan-quality decisions before connectivity results, prioritise corrected estimates and uncertainty over isolated p-values or colourful maps, and write a Discussion that distinguished neural association from prognosis, avoided calling connectivity a biomarker without external validation and addressed lesion characteristics and rehabilitation exposure.
Candidate journals were compared for neurology and neuroscience scope, clinical-neuroimaging readership, study-design expectations, article type and publication cost, with Scopus coverage and quartile checked at selection because classifications can change. The selected Q2 outlet aligned with a carefully bounded post-stroke imaging study rather than an unsupported mechanistic claim.
A participant-flow diagram with reasons for clinical and image-quality exclusions was added, the analysis was repeated using stricter motion censoring to check whether the main pattern remained stable, prespecified comparisons were corrected with secondary maps moved to the supplement, and a point-by-point response linked every reviewer comment to revised text, figures, tables or analyses.
The outcome
Following major revisions, the manuscript was accepted by a Scopus-indexed Q2 neurology and neuroscience journal. The outcome reflects structured consultation, transparent reanalysis and careful revision — not a guarantee of acceptance for other manuscripts.
The researcher gained a reusable framework for neuroimaging quality control, corrected statistical inference, clinically justified covariate selection and cautious interpretation. The same workflow can support future stroke studies while preserving a clear boundary between exploratory imaging evidence and validated clinical prediction.
How we delivered this outcome
Could your research be the next case study?
Book a free consultation and we’ll map the fastest credible path from your manuscript to a published, indexed outcome.