Best practices or tools for objectively comparing different nuisance regression strategies (e.g., QC-FC metrics) after XCP-D processing?

Software Support
,
1

Summary of what happened:

I am currently using XCP-D to post-process my fMRI data (preprocessed with fMRIPrep). I am interested in testing different nuisance regression strategies (e.g., motion-filter-type notch vs. LP) to see which one works best for my specific dataset (one is mutilband TR<1s, one is singleband TR=2s).

I have successfully run XCP-D with different parameters, but I am looking for a standardized or “objective” way to compare the denoising efficacy across these runs. Specifically, I am looking for methods to calculate metrics like QC-FC correlations or distance-dependent motion effects.

Or any other way I can compare the different regression methods using the QC-review generated by x-cpd.

Best

Command used (and if a helper script was used, a link to the helper script or the command generated):

    --motion-filter-type notch \
    --band-stop-min 12 \
    --band-stop-max 18 \

    --motion-filter-type lp \
    --band-stop-min 6 \

Version:

x-cpd-0.14.1

Environment (Docker, Singularity / Apptainer, custom installation):

Apptainer