Abstract

Despite the prevalence of research on single-subject cerebral morphological networks in recent years, whether they can offer a reliable way for multicentric studies remains largely unknown. Using two multicentric datasets of traveling subjects, this work systematically examined the inter-site test-retest (TRT) reliabilities of single-subject cerebral morphological networks, and further evaluated the effects of several key factors. We found that most graph-based network measures exhibited fair to excellent reliabilities regardless of different analytical pipelines. Nevertheless, the reliabilities were affected by choices of morphological index (fractal dimension > sulcal depth > gyrification index > cortical thickness), brain parcellation (high-resolution > low-resolution), thresholding method (proportional > absolute), and network type (binarized > weighted). For the factor of similarity measure, its effects depended on the thresholding method used (absolute: Kullback-Leibler divergence > Jensen-Shannon divergence; proportional: Jensen-Shannon divergence > Kullback-Leibler divergence). Furthermore, longer data acquisition intervals and different scanner software versions significantly reduced the reliabilities. Finally, we showed that inter-site reliabilities were significantly lower than intra-site reliabilities for single-subject cerebral morphological networks. Altogether, our findings propose single-subject cerebral morphological networks as a promising approach for multicentric human connectome studies, and offer recommendations on how to determine analytical pipelines and scanning protocols for obtaining reliable results.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call