首页> 外文期刊>NeuroImage >Proportional thresholding in resting-state fMRI functional connectivity networks and consequences for patient-control connectome studies: Issues and recommendations
【24h】

Proportional thresholding in resting-state fMRI functional connectivity networks and consequences for patient-control connectome studies: Issues and recommendations

机译:休息状态FMRI功能连接网络中的比例阈值和患者控制结合研究的后果:问题和建议

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Abstract Graph theoretical analysis has become an important tool in the examination of brain dysconnectivity in neurological and psychiatric brain disorders. A common analysis step in the construction of the functional graph or network involves “thresholding” of the connectivity matrix, selecting the set of edges that together form the graph on which network organization is evaluated. To avoid systematic differences in absolute number of edges, studies have argued against the use of an “absolute threshold” in case-control studies and have proposed the use of “proportional thresholding” instead, in which a pre-defined number of strongest connections are selected as network edges, ensuring equal network density across datasets. Here, we systematically studied the effect of proportional thresholding on the construction of functional matrices and subsequent graph analysis in patient-control functional connectome studies. In a few simple experiments we show that differences in overall strength of functional connectivity (FC) – as often observed between patients and controls – can have predictable consequences for between-group differences in network organization. In individual networks with lower overall FC the proportional thresholding algorithm has to select more edges based on lower correlations, which have (on average) a higher probability of being spurious, and thus introduces a higher degree of randomness in the resulting network. We show across both empirical and artificial patient-control datasets that lower levels of overall FC in either the patient or control group will most often lead to differences in network efficiency and clustering, suggesting that differences in FC across subjects will be artificially inflated or translated into differences in network organization. Based on the presented case-control findings we inform about the caveats of proportional thresholding in patient-control studies in which groups show a between-group difference in overall FC. We make recommendations on how to examine, report and to take into account overall FC effects in future patient-control functional connectome studies. Highlights ? Proportional thresholding is a commonly used analysis step in the reconstruction of functional brain networks to ensure equal density across patient and control samples. ? Proportional thresholding may result in the inclusion of more spurious connections in datasets based on low overall functional connectivity (FC). ? When graph analysis is applied to these networks low overall FC may translate into more random network characterization. ? Systematic differences in overall FC between patients and controls can artificially inflate differences in network organization. ? We recommend to test and control for differences in overall FC in functional disease connectome studies.
机译:摘要图形理论分析已成为神经和精神病脑障碍脑渗滤性检查的重要工具。函数图或网络的构造中的常见分析步骤涉及连接矩阵的“阈值”,选择将绘制的曲线组一起选择评估网络组织的图表。为了避免绝对数量的边缘的系统差异,研究已经反对在案例控制研究中使用“绝对阈值”,并且提出了使用“比例阈值”,其中,其中预定数量的最强连接是选择为网络边缘,确保跨数据集的相同网络密度。这里,我们系统地研究了比例阈值对功能矩阵构建的影响及随后的患者控制功能结合研究中的图形分析。在几个简单的实验中,我们表明功能性连接(FC)的总体强度差异 - 经常在患者和对照之间观察到 - 可以对网络组织的组间差异具有可预测的后果。在具有较低总体FC的单个网络中,比例阈值算法必须基于较低的相关性选择更多边缘,其具有(平均)是虚假的更高概率,因此在所得到的网络中引入更高程度的随机性。我们在经验和人造患者控制数据集中展示了患者或对照组中的整体FC水平的较低水平最常会导致网络效率和聚类的差异,这表明跨对象的FC的差异将是人为地膨胀或翻译成的网络组织的差异。基于所提出的案例对照调查结果,我们通知了患者对照研究中比例阈值的警告,其中组在整体FC中显示了组差异。我们提出了关于如何检查,报告和考虑到未来患者控制功能的结合研究中的整体FC效果的建议。强调 ?比例阈值化是在功能性脑网络重建中的常用分析步骤,以确保患者和控制样品之间的相等密度。还是比例阈值可能导致基于低整体功能连接(FC)在数据集中包含更杂散的连接。还是当图形分析应用于这些网络时,低总体FC可以转化为更随机的网络表征。还是患者与控制之间的整体FC的系统差异可以人为地膨胀网络组织的差异。还是我们建议测试和控制功能性疾病连接研究中总体FC的差异。

著录项

  • 来源
    《NeuroImage》 |2017年第2017期|共13页
  • 作者单位

    Brain Center Rudolf Magnus Department of Psychiatry University Medical Center Utrecht;

    Brain Center Rudolf Magnus Department of Psychiatry University Medical Center Utrecht;

    Melbourne Neuropsychiatry Centre &

    Melbourne School of Engineering The University of Melbourne;

    Melbourne Neuropsychiatry Centre &

    Melbourne School of Engineering The University of Melbourne;

    Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering Clinical Imaging Research Center Singapore Institute;

    Brain Center Rudolf Magnus Department of Neurology University Medical Center Utrecht;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 诊断学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号