Literature DB >> 29253655

Considering factors affecting the connectome-based identification process: Comment on Waller et al.

Corey Horien1, Stephanie Noble2, Emily S Finn3, Xilin Shen4, Dustin Scheinost5, R Todd Constable6.   

Abstract

A recent study by Waller and colleagues evaluated the reliability, specificity, and generalizability of using functional connectivity data to identify individuals from a group. The authors note they were able to replicate identification rates in a larger version of the original Human Connectome Project (HCP) dataset. However, they also report lower identification accuracies when using historical neuroimaging acquisitions with low spatial and temporal resolution. The authors suggest that their results indicate connectomes derived from historical imaging data may be similar across individuals, to the extent that this connectome-based approach may be inappropriate for precision psychiatry and the goal of drawing inferences based on subject-level data. Here we note that the authors did not take into account factors affecting data quality and hence identification rates, independent of whether a low spatiotemporal resolution acquisition or a high spatiotemporal resolution acquisition is used. Specifically, we show here that the amount of data collected per subject and in-scanner motion are the predominant factors influencing identification rates, not the spatiotemporal resolution of the acquisition. To do this, we investigated identification rates in the HCP dataset as a function of the amount of data and motion. Using a dataset from the Consortium for Reliability and Reproducibility (CoRR), we investigated the impact of multiband versus non-multiband imaging parameters; that is, high spatiotemporal resolution versus low spatiotemporal resolution acquisitions. We show scan length and motion affect identification, whereas the imaging protocol does not affect these rates. Our results suggest that motion and amount of data per subject are the primary factors impacting individual connectivity profiles, but that within these constraints, individual differences in the connectome are readily observable.
Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29253655      PMCID: PMC5856612          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.12.045

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  20 in total

1.  Functional brain hubs and their test-retest reliability: a multiband resting-state functional MRI study.

Authors:  Xu-Hong Liao; Ming-Rui Xia; Ting Xu; Zheng-Jia Dai; Xiao-Yan Cao; Hai-Jing Niu; Xi-Nian Zuo; Yu-Feng Zang; Yong He
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-07-27       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Evaluating the replicability, specificity, and generalizability of connectome fingerprints.

Authors:  Lea Waller; Henrik Walter; Johann D Kruschwitz; Lucia Reuter; Sabine Müller; Susanne Erk; Ilya M Veer
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Delayed stabilization and individualization in connectome development are related to psychiatric disorders.

Authors:  Tobias Kaufmann; Dag Alnæs; Nhat Trung Doan; Christine Lycke Brandt; Ole A Andreassen; Lars T Westlye
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 24.884

Review 4.  Prediction as a humanitarian and pragmatic contribution from human cognitive neuroscience.

Authors:  John D E Gabrieli; Satrajit S Ghosh; Susan Whitfield-Gabrieli
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 17.173

5.  The effect of scan length on the reliability of resting-state fMRI connectivity estimates.

Authors:  Rasmus M Birn; Erin K Molloy; Rémi Patriat; Taurean Parker; Timothy B Meier; Gregory R Kirk; Veena A Nair; M Elizabeth Meyerand; Vivek Prabhakaran
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-06-06       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Functional System and Areal Organization of a Highly Sampled Individual Human Brain.

Authors:  Timothy O Laumann; Evan M Gordon; Babatunde Adeyemo; Abraham Z Snyder; Sung Jun Joo; Mei-Yen Chen; Adrian W Gilmore; Kathleen B McDermott; Steven M Nelson; Nico U F Dosenbach; Bradley L Schlaggar; Jeanette A Mumford; Russell A Poldrack; Steven E Petersen
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 17.173

Review 7.  The WU-Minn Human Connectome Project: an overview.

Authors:  David C Van Essen; Stephen M Smith; Deanna M Barch; Timothy E J Behrens; Essa Yacoub; Kamil Ugurbil
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-05-16       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Reliability correction for functional connectivity: Theory and implementation.

Authors:  Sophia Mueller; Danhong Wang; Michael D Fox; Ruiqi Pan; Jie Lu; Kuncheng Li; Wei Sun; Randy L Buckner; Hesheng Liu
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Reliability and reproducibility of individual differences in functional connectivity acquired during task and resting state.

Authors:  Lubdha M Shah; Justin A Cramer; Michael A Ferguson; Rasmus M Birn; Jeffrey S Anderson
Journal:  Brain Behav       Date:  2016-03-30       Impact factor: 2.708

Review 10.  Can brain state be manipulated to emphasize individual differences in functional connectivity?

Authors:  Emily S Finn; Dustin Scheinost; Daniel M Finn; Xilin Shen; Xenophon Papademetris; R Todd Constable
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 6.556

View more
  15 in total

1.  Classification of schizophrenia by intersubject correlation in functional connectome.

Authors:  Gong-Jun Ji; Xingui Chen; Tongjian Bai; Lu Wang; Qiang Wei; Yaxiang Gao; Longxiang Tao; Kongliang He; Dandan Li; Yi Dong; Panpan Hu; Fengqiong Yu; Chunyan Zhu; Yanghua Tian; Yongqiang Yu; Kai Wang
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Distinctions among real and apparent respiratory motions in human fMRI data.

Authors:  Jonathan D Power; Charles J Lynch; Benjamin M Silver; Marc J Dubin; Alex Martin; Rebecca M Jones
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  The individual functional connectome is unique and stable over months to years.

Authors:  Corey Horien; Xilin Shen; Dustin Scheinost; R Todd Constable
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-02-02       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Genetic variation in endocannabinoid signaling is associated with differential network-level functional connectivity in youth.

Authors:  Lucinda M Sisk; Kristina M Rapuano; May I Conley; Abigail S Greene; Corey Horien; Monica D Rosenberg; Dustin Scheinost; R Todd Constable; Charles E Glatt; B J Casey; Dylan G Gee
Journal:  J Neurosci Res       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 4.164

5.  Optimizing differential identifiability improves connectome predictive modeling of cognitive deficits from functional connectivity in Alzheimer's disease.

Authors:  Diana O Svaldi; Joaquín Goñi; Kausar Abbas; Enrico Amico; David G Clark; Charanya Muralidharan; Mario Dzemidzic; John D West; Shannon L Risacher; Andrew J Saykin; Liana G Apostolova
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2021-05-05       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  A Comparison of Static and Dynamic Functional Connectivities for Identifying Subjects and Biological Sex Using Intrinsic Individual Brain Connectivity.

Authors:  Sreevalsan S Menon; K Krishnamurthy
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-04-05       Impact factor: 4.379

7.  Smooth graph learning for functional connectivity estimation.

Authors:  Siyuan Gao; Xinyue Xia; Dustin Scheinost; Gal Mishne
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2021-06-23       Impact factor: 7.400

8.  A decade of test-retest reliability of functional connectivity: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Stephanie Noble; Dustin Scheinost; R Todd Constable
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2019-09-05       Impact factor: 7.400

9.  Accurate prediction of individual subject identity and task, but not autism diagnosis, from functional connectomes.

Authors:  Lisa Byrge; Daniel P Kennedy
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2020-03-09       Impact factor: 5.038

10.  Behavioral and brain signatures of substance use vulnerability in childhood.

Authors:  Kristina M Rapuano; Monica D Rosenberg; Maria T Maza; Nicholas J Dennis; Mila Dorji; Abigail S Greene; Corey Horien; Dustin Scheinost; R Todd Constable; B J Casey
Journal:  Dev Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2020-11-03       Impact factor: 5.811

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.