Abstract
The field of adult neuroimaging relies on well-established principles in research design, imaging sequences, processing pipelines, as well as safety and data collection protocols. The field of infant magnetic resonance imaging, by comparison, is a young field with tremendous scientific potential but continuously evolving standards. The present article aims to initiate a constructive dialog between researchers who grapple with the challenges and inherent limitations of a nascent field and reviewers who evaluate their work. We address 20 questions that researchers commonly receive from research ethics boards, grant, and manuscript reviewers related to infant neuroimaging data collection, safety protocols, study planning, imaging sequences, decisions related to software and hardware, and data processing and sharing, while acknowledging both the accomplishments of the field and areas of much needed future advancements. This article reflects the cumulative knowledge of experts in the FIT’NG community and can act as a resource for both researchers and reviewers alike seeking a deeper understanding of the standards and tradeoffs involved in infant neuroimaging.
Highlights
Over the past three decades, infant neuroimaging has gained increasing attention for its groundbreaking insights into early human brain development and the neurodevelopmental ori gins of health and disease
Time with the infant and par ents in the scanner room may be beneficial to get the infant used to the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) padding and safety straps necessary to prevent the infant from rolling off the bed
We have found that the decision of when to stop a scan varies based on study goals and the specific needs of the studied population
Summary
Over the past three decades, infant neuroimaging (ages 0–12 months) has gained increasing attention for its groundbreaking insights into early human brain development and the neurodevelopmental ori gins of health and disease. Infant magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has emerged as an incredibly valuable tool, with several landmark stud ies—the developing Human Connectome Project (dHCP) (Hughes et al, 2017), Baby Connectome Project (BCP) (Howell et al, 2019), and HEALthy Brain and Child Development (HBCD) (Morris et al, 2020), among others—launched in recent years that are poised to yield important new discoveries Despite these considerable successes, the field of infant neuro imaging is still nascent. In the absence of widely accepted best practices, even reasonable meth odological choices can be subject to critique at every stage of the review process, from the ethics review of research protocols, to grant proposals and manuscripts This scrutiny is critical to the success of our field as we strive to develop field-wide standards that ensure rigor and reproduc ibility. Our responses reflect the current literature and authors’ cumulative knowl edge and experience
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
