BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Measurements of resting-state functional connectivity have increasingly been used for characterization of neuropathologic and neurodevelopmental populations. We collected data to characterize how much imaging time is necessary to obtain reproducible quantitative functional connectivity measurements needed for a reliable single-subject diagnostic test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained 100 five-minute BOLD scans on a single subject, divided into 10 sessions of 10 scans each, with the subject at rest or while watching video clips of cartoons. These data were compared with resting-state BOLD scans from 36 healthy control subjects by evaluating the correlation between each pair of 64 small spheric regions of interest obtained from a published functional brain parcellation. RESULTS: Single-subject and group data converged to reliable estimates of individual and population connectivity values proportional to 1 / sqrt(n). Dramatic improvements in reliability were seen by using ≤25 minutes of imaging time, with smaller improvements for additional time. Functional connectivity "fingerprints" for the individual and population began diverging at approximately 15 minutes of imaging time, with increasing reliability even at 4 hours of imaging time. Twenty-five minutes of BOLD imaging time was required before any individual connections could reliably discriminate an individual from a group of healthy control subjects. A classifier discriminating scans during which our subject was resting or watching cartoons was 95% accurate at 10 minutes and 100% accurate at 15 minutes of imaging time. CONCLUSIONS: An individual subject and control population converged to reliable different functional connectivity profiles that were task-modulated and could be discriminated with sufficient imaging time.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Measurements of resting-state functional connectivity have increasingly been used for characterization of neuropathologic and neurodevelopmental populations. We collected data to characterize how much imaging time is necessary to obtain reproducible quantitative functional connectivity measurements needed for a reliable single-subject diagnostic test. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We obtained 100 five-minute BOLD scans on a single subject, divided into 10 sessions of 10 scans each, with the subject at rest or while watching video clips of cartoons. These data were compared with resting-state BOLD scans from 36 healthy control subjects by evaluating the correlation between each pair of 64 small spheric regions of interest obtained from a published functional brain parcellation. RESULTS: Single-subject and group data converged to reliable estimates of individual and population connectivity values proportional to 1 / sqrt(n). Dramatic improvements in reliability were seen by using ≤25 minutes of imaging time, with smaller improvements for additional time. Functional connectivity "fingerprints" for the individual and population began diverging at approximately 15 minutes of imaging time, with increasing reliability even at 4 hours of imaging time. Twenty-five minutes of BOLD imaging time was required before any individual connections could reliably discriminate an individual from a group of healthy control subjects. A classifier discriminating scans during which our subject was resting or watching cartoons was 95% accurate at 10 minutes and 100% accurate at 15 minutes of imaging time. CONCLUSIONS: An individual subject and control population converged to reliable different functional connectivity profiles that were task-modulated and could be discriminated with sufficient imaging time.
Authors: N Tzourio-Mazoyer; B Landeau; D Papathanassiou; F Crivello; O Etard; N Delcroix; B Mazoyer; M Joliot Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: A M Clare Kelly; Lucina Q Uddin; Bharat B Biswal; F Xavier Castellanos; Michael P Milham Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2007-08-23 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Silvina G Horovitz; Masaki Fukunaga; Jacco A de Zwart; Peter van Gelderen; Susan C Fulton; Thomas J Balkin; Jeff H Duyn Journal: Hum Brain Mapp Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 5.038
Authors: Ben J Harrison; Jesus Pujol; Marina López-Solà; Rosa Hernández-Ribas; Joan Deus; Hector Ortiz; Carles Soriano-Mas; Murat Yücel; Christos Pantelis; Narcís Cardoner Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: David E Stark; Daniel S Margulies; Zarrar E Shehzad; Philip Reiss; A M Clare Kelly; Lucina Q Uddin; Dylan G Gee; Amy K Roy; Marie T Banich; F Xavier Castellanos; Michael P Milham Journal: J Neurosci Date: 2008-12-17 Impact factor: 6.167
Authors: Mark J Lowe; Micheal D Phillips; Joseph T Lurito; David Mattson; Mario Dzemidzic; Vincent P Mathews Journal: Radiology Date: 2002-07 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jeffrey S Anderson; Jared A Nielsen; Alyson L Froehlich; Molly B DuBray; T Jason Druzgal; Annahir N Cariello; Jason R Cooperrider; Brandon A Zielinski; Caitlin Ravichandran; P Thomas Fletcher; Andrew L Alexander; Erin D Bigler; Nicholas Lange; Janet E Lainhart Journal: Brain Date: 2011-10-17 Impact factor: 13.501
Authors: Chelsea M Stillman; Evan M Gordon; Jessica R Simon; Chandan J Vaidya; Darlene V Howard; James H Howard Journal: Brain Connect Date: 2013-11-14
Authors: J S Anderson; H S Dhatt; M A Ferguson; M Lopez-Larson; L E Schrock; P A House; D Yurgelun-Todd Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2011-09-01 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Amanda F Mejia; Mary Beth Nebel; Anita D Barber; Ann S Choe; James J Pekar; Brian S Caffo; Martin A Lindquist Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 6.556