MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Multisite reliability of MR-based functional connectivity

2016· article· en· W2532111145 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie Noble, Dustin Scheinost, Emily S. Finn, Xilin Shen, Xenophon Papademetris, Sarah McEwen, Carrie E. Bearden, Jean Addington, Bradley G. Goodyear, Kristin S. Cadenhead, Heline Mirzakhanian, Barbara A. Cornblatt, Doreen M. Olvet, Daniel H. Mathalon, Thomas H. McGlashan, Diana O. Perkins, Ayşenil Belger, Larry J. Seidman, Heidi W. Thermenos, Ming T. Tsuang, Theo G.M. van Erp, Elaine F. Walker, Stephan Hamann, Scott W. Woods, Tyrone D. Cannon, R. Todd Constable

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Mental HealthNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsGeneralizability theoryFunctional connectivityResting state fMRIUnivariateVoxelHuman Connectome ProjectReliability (semiconductor)ConnectomeNeuroimagingComputer sciencePsychologyNeuroscienceArtificial intelligenceStatisticsMathematicsMultivariate statisticsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent years have witnessed an increasing number of multisite MRI functional connectivity (fcMRI) studies. While multisite studies provide an efficient way to accelerate data collection and increase sample sizes, especially for rare clinical populations, any effects of site or MRI scanner could ultimately limit power and weaken results. Little data exists on the stability of functional connectivity measurements across sites and sessions. In this study, we assess the influence of site and session on resting state functional connectivity measurements in a healthy cohort of traveling subjects (8 subjects scanned twice at each of 8 sites) scanned as part of the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS). Reliability was investigated in three types of connectivity analyses: (1) seed-based connectivity with posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), right motor cortex (RMC), and left thalamus (LT) as seeds; (2) the intrinsic connectivity distribution (ICD), a voxel-wise connectivity measure; and (3) matrix connectivity, a whole-brain, atlas-based approach to assessing connectivity between nodes. Contributions to variability in connectivity due to subject, site, and day-of-scan were quantified and used to assess between-session (test-retest) reliability in accordance with Generalizability Theory. Overall, no major site, scanner manufacturer, or day-of-scan effects were found for the univariate connectivity analyses; instead, subject effects dominated relative to the other measured factors. However, summaries of voxel-wise connectivity were found to be sensitive to site and scanner manufacturer effects. For all connectivity measures, although subject variance was three times the site variance, the residual represented 60-80% of the variance, indicating that connectivity differed greatly from scan to scan independent of any of the measured factors (i.e., subject, site, and day-of-scan). Thus, for a single 5min scan, reliability across connectivity measures was poor (ICC=0.07-0.17), but increased with increasing scan duration (ICC=0.21-0.36 at 25min). The limited effects of site and scanner manufacturer support the use of multisite studies, such as NAPLS, as a viable means of collecting data on rare populations and increasing power in univariate functional connectivity studies. However, the results indicate that aggregation of fcMRI data across longer scan durations is necessary to increase the reliability of connectivity estimates at the single-subject level.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: Reproducibility · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.219 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designObservational
DomainReproducibility
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations185
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImageSame topicFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesFrench-language works237,207