Loading…

A - 4 Establishing Test–Retest Reliability of Large-Scale Neural Networks after Neurotrauma: toward Clinically Useful Biomarkers

Abstract Objective Integrating neuropsychological assessment and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) may provide crucial information about brain functioning and cognition. However, rsfMRI is not ready to be used clinically due to questions about reproducibility. This study i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Archives of clinical neuropsychology 2023-10, Vol.38 (7), p.1149-1149
Main Authors: Mullin, Hollie, Carpenter, Catherine M, Cwiek, Andrew P, Lan, Gloria, Carter, Emily E, Vervoordt, Samantha, Rabinowitz, Amanda R, Venkatesan, Umesh M, Hillary, Frank G
Format: Article
Language:English
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page 1149
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1149
container_title Archives of clinical neuropsychology
container_volume 38
creator Mullin, Hollie
Carpenter, Catherine M
Cwiek, Andrew P
Lan, Gloria
Carter, Emily E
Vervoordt, Samantha
Rabinowitz, Amanda R
Venkatesan, Umesh M
Hillary, Frank G
description Abstract Objective Integrating neuropsychological assessment and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) may provide crucial information about brain functioning and cognition. However, rsfMRI is not ready to be used clinically due to questions about reproducibility. This study investigated the test–retest reliability of resting-state networks in moderate-to-severe TBI using back-to-back rsfMRI scans. Method 51 TBI participants and 28 healthy controls received two, 10-minute rsfMRI scans separated by minutes. The data were preprocessed with fMRIPrep. XcpEngine was used to divide the brain into 264 regions based on the Power atlas, which were then grouped into 13 brain networks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to examine the reliability of within-network connectivity (strength of a region’s connection to other regions within the same network) for each network across each participant’s two scans. Results ICCs for healthy controls varied in reliability (ICCs = 0.42–0.80). ICCs for the TBI group varied similarly (ICCs = 0.41–0.86). For both groups, the most reliable networks were the dorsal attention, visual, and sensory networks (ICCs = 0.77–0.81). The least reliable networks were the cerebellar and ventral attention networks (ICCs = 0.42–0.43). Overlapping intervals for the ICC values indicated non-significant differences in network reliability between the healthy control and TBI groups. Conclusions Results suggest that within-network connectivity is more reliable in attentional and sensory networks, even after significant neurological compromise. However, the variability of within-network ICCs should continue to be explored. Alterations in network reliability may relate to changes in cognition and serve as a starting point to identify resting-state biomarkers, especially after moderate-to-severe TBI.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/arclin/acad067.010
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>oup_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_arclin_acad067_010</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/arclin/acad067.010</oup_id><sourcerecordid>10.1093/arclin/acad067.010</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c151t-785ee14cfc798a7deec854ce2a67a36b3c482116a6099dad2c56db27c95764863</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1OwzAUhC0EEqVwAVa-QFo7P7bDrlTlR6pAKu06enFeiqnbVLajqjvEFbghJyHQLliymtHTzNPoI-SaswFneTIEp63ZDEFDxYQcMM5OSI8rmUSZSpPTP_6cXHj_xhjLOI975GNEI5rSiQ9QWuNfzWZJ5-jD1_vnDENn6AytgdJYE_a0qekU3BKjFw0W6RO2DmwnYde4ladQB3S_1yY4aNdwQ0OzA1fRcbfOdB27pwuPdWvprWnW4Fbo_CU5q8F6vDpqnyzuJvPxQzR9vn8cj6aR5hkPkVQZIk91rWWuQFaIWmWpxhiEhESUiU5VzLkAwfK8girWmajKWOo8kyJVIumT-PBXu8Z7h3WxdabbsC84K34oFgeKxZFi0VHsStGh1LTb_-S_Aa53enI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>A - 4 Establishing Test–Retest Reliability of Large-Scale Neural Networks after Neurotrauma: toward Clinically Useful Biomarkers</title><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Mullin, Hollie ; Carpenter, Catherine M ; Cwiek, Andrew P ; Lan, Gloria ; Carter, Emily E ; Vervoordt, Samantha ; Rabinowitz, Amanda R ; Venkatesan, Umesh M ; Hillary, Frank G</creator><creatorcontrib>Mullin, Hollie ; Carpenter, Catherine M ; Cwiek, Andrew P ; Lan, Gloria ; Carter, Emily E ; Vervoordt, Samantha ; Rabinowitz, Amanda R ; Venkatesan, Umesh M ; Hillary, Frank G</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Objective Integrating neuropsychological assessment and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) may provide crucial information about brain functioning and cognition. However, rsfMRI is not ready to be used clinically due to questions about reproducibility. This study investigated the test–retest reliability of resting-state networks in moderate-to-severe TBI using back-to-back rsfMRI scans. Method 51 TBI participants and 28 healthy controls received two, 10-minute rsfMRI scans separated by minutes. The data were preprocessed with fMRIPrep. XcpEngine was used to divide the brain into 264 regions based on the Power atlas, which were then grouped into 13 brain networks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to examine the reliability of within-network connectivity (strength of a region’s connection to other regions within the same network) for each network across each participant’s two scans. Results ICCs for healthy controls varied in reliability (ICCs = 0.42–0.80). ICCs for the TBI group varied similarly (ICCs = 0.41–0.86). For both groups, the most reliable networks were the dorsal attention, visual, and sensory networks (ICCs = 0.77–0.81). The least reliable networks were the cerebellar and ventral attention networks (ICCs = 0.42–0.43). Overlapping intervals for the ICC values indicated non-significant differences in network reliability between the healthy control and TBI groups. Conclusions Results suggest that within-network connectivity is more reliable in attentional and sensory networks, even after significant neurological compromise. However, the variability of within-network ICCs should continue to be explored. Alterations in network reliability may relate to changes in cognition and serve as a starting point to identify resting-state biomarkers, especially after moderate-to-severe TBI.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1873-5843</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5843</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acad067.010</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><ispartof>Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 2023-10, Vol.38 (7), p.1149-1149</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com. 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Mullin, Hollie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carpenter, Catherine M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cwiek, Andrew P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lan, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carter, Emily E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vervoordt, Samantha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabinowitz, Amanda R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venkatesan, Umesh M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hillary, Frank G</creatorcontrib><title>A - 4 Establishing Test–Retest Reliability of Large-Scale Neural Networks after Neurotrauma: toward Clinically Useful Biomarkers</title><title>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</title><description>Abstract Objective Integrating neuropsychological assessment and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) may provide crucial information about brain functioning and cognition. However, rsfMRI is not ready to be used clinically due to questions about reproducibility. This study investigated the test–retest reliability of resting-state networks in moderate-to-severe TBI using back-to-back rsfMRI scans. Method 51 TBI participants and 28 healthy controls received two, 10-minute rsfMRI scans separated by minutes. The data were preprocessed with fMRIPrep. XcpEngine was used to divide the brain into 264 regions based on the Power atlas, which were then grouped into 13 brain networks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to examine the reliability of within-network connectivity (strength of a region’s connection to other regions within the same network) for each network across each participant’s two scans. Results ICCs for healthy controls varied in reliability (ICCs = 0.42–0.80). ICCs for the TBI group varied similarly (ICCs = 0.41–0.86). For both groups, the most reliable networks were the dorsal attention, visual, and sensory networks (ICCs = 0.77–0.81). The least reliable networks were the cerebellar and ventral attention networks (ICCs = 0.42–0.43). Overlapping intervals for the ICC values indicated non-significant differences in network reliability between the healthy control and TBI groups. Conclusions Results suggest that within-network connectivity is more reliable in attentional and sensory networks, even after significant neurological compromise. However, the variability of within-network ICCs should continue to be explored. Alterations in network reliability may relate to changes in cognition and serve as a starting point to identify resting-state biomarkers, especially after moderate-to-severe TBI.</description><issn>1873-5843</issn><issn>1873-5843</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkE1OwzAUhC0EEqVwAVa-QFo7P7bDrlTlR6pAKu06enFeiqnbVLajqjvEFbghJyHQLliymtHTzNPoI-SaswFneTIEp63ZDEFDxYQcMM5OSI8rmUSZSpPTP_6cXHj_xhjLOI975GNEI5rSiQ9QWuNfzWZJ5-jD1_vnDENn6AytgdJYE_a0qekU3BKjFw0W6RO2DmwnYde4ladQB3S_1yY4aNdwQ0OzA1fRcbfOdB27pwuPdWvprWnW4Fbo_CU5q8F6vDpqnyzuJvPxQzR9vn8cj6aR5hkPkVQZIk91rWWuQFaIWmWpxhiEhESUiU5VzLkAwfK8girWmajKWOo8kyJVIumT-PBXu8Z7h3WxdabbsC84K34oFgeKxZFi0VHsStGh1LTb_-S_Aa53enI</recordid><startdate>20231020</startdate><enddate>20231020</enddate><creator>Mullin, Hollie</creator><creator>Carpenter, Catherine M</creator><creator>Cwiek, Andrew P</creator><creator>Lan, Gloria</creator><creator>Carter, Emily E</creator><creator>Vervoordt, Samantha</creator><creator>Rabinowitz, Amanda R</creator><creator>Venkatesan, Umesh M</creator><creator>Hillary, Frank G</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20231020</creationdate><title>A - 4 Establishing Test–Retest Reliability of Large-Scale Neural Networks after Neurotrauma: toward Clinically Useful Biomarkers</title><author>Mullin, Hollie ; Carpenter, Catherine M ; Cwiek, Andrew P ; Lan, Gloria ; Carter, Emily E ; Vervoordt, Samantha ; Rabinowitz, Amanda R ; Venkatesan, Umesh M ; Hillary, Frank G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c151t-785ee14cfc798a7deec854ce2a67a36b3c482116a6099dad2c56db27c95764863</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Mullin, Hollie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carpenter, Catherine M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cwiek, Andrew P</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lan, Gloria</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Carter, Emily E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vervoordt, Samantha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rabinowitz, Amanda R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Venkatesan, Umesh M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hillary, Frank G</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Mullin, Hollie</au><au>Carpenter, Catherine M</au><au>Cwiek, Andrew P</au><au>Lan, Gloria</au><au>Carter, Emily E</au><au>Vervoordt, Samantha</au><au>Rabinowitz, Amanda R</au><au>Venkatesan, Umesh M</au><au>Hillary, Frank G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A - 4 Establishing Test–Retest Reliability of Large-Scale Neural Networks after Neurotrauma: toward Clinically Useful Biomarkers</atitle><jtitle>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</jtitle><date>2023-10-20</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1149</spage><epage>1149</epage><pages>1149-1149</pages><issn>1873-5843</issn><eissn>1873-5843</eissn><abstract>Abstract Objective Integrating neuropsychological assessment and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rsfMRI) may provide crucial information about brain functioning and cognition. However, rsfMRI is not ready to be used clinically due to questions about reproducibility. This study investigated the test–retest reliability of resting-state networks in moderate-to-severe TBI using back-to-back rsfMRI scans. Method 51 TBI participants and 28 healthy controls received two, 10-minute rsfMRI scans separated by minutes. The data were preprocessed with fMRIPrep. XcpEngine was used to divide the brain into 264 regions based on the Power atlas, which were then grouped into 13 brain networks. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated to examine the reliability of within-network connectivity (strength of a region’s connection to other regions within the same network) for each network across each participant’s two scans. Results ICCs for healthy controls varied in reliability (ICCs = 0.42–0.80). ICCs for the TBI group varied similarly (ICCs = 0.41–0.86). For both groups, the most reliable networks were the dorsal attention, visual, and sensory networks (ICCs = 0.77–0.81). The least reliable networks were the cerebellar and ventral attention networks (ICCs = 0.42–0.43). Overlapping intervals for the ICC values indicated non-significant differences in network reliability between the healthy control and TBI groups. Conclusions Results suggest that within-network connectivity is more reliable in attentional and sensory networks, even after significant neurological compromise. However, the variability of within-network ICCs should continue to be explored. Alterations in network reliability may relate to changes in cognition and serve as a starting point to identify resting-state biomarkers, especially after moderate-to-severe TBI.</abstract><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.1093/arclin/acad067.010</doi><tpages>1</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1873-5843
ispartof Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 2023-10, Vol.38 (7), p.1149-1149
issn 1873-5843
1873-5843
language eng
recordid cdi_crossref_primary_10_1093_arclin_acad067_010
source Oxford Journals Online
title A - 4 Establishing Test–Retest Reliability of Large-Scale Neural Networks after Neurotrauma: toward Clinically Useful Biomarkers
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T19%3A31%3A43IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-oup_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20-%204%20Establishing%20Test%E2%80%93Retest%20Reliability%20of%20Large-Scale%20Neural%20Networks%20after%20Neurotrauma:%20toward%20Clinically%20Useful%20Biomarkers&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20clinical%20neuropsychology&rft.au=Mullin,%20Hollie&rft.date=2023-10-20&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1149&rft.epage=1149&rft.pages=1149-1149&rft.issn=1873-5843&rft.eissn=1873-5843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/arclin/acad067.010&rft_dat=%3Coup_cross%3E10.1093/arclin/acad067.010%3C/oup_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c151t-785ee14cfc798a7deec854ce2a67a36b3c482116a6099dad2c56db27c95764863%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_oup_id=10.1093/arclin/acad067.010&rfr_iscdi=true