Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28580294›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2017

Gender differences in the structural connectome of the teenage brain revealed by generalized q-sampling MRI.

Yeu-Sheng Tyan, Jan-Ray Liao, Chao-Yu Shen, Yu-Chieh Lin, Jun-Cheng Weng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Brain architecture-based vulnerability to traumatic injury.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Yeu-Sheng TyanDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiological Sciences, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Medical Imaging, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan; School of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Jan-Ray LiaoGraduate Institute of Communication Engineering, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Electrical Engineering, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chao-Yu ShenDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiological Sciences, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Medical Imaging, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan; Institute of Medicine, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Yu-Chieh LinDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiological Sciences, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Jun-Cheng WengDepartment of Medical Imaging and Radiological Sciences, Chung Shan Medical University, Taichung, Taiwan; Department of Medical Imaging, Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan. Electronic address: jcweng@csmu.edu.tw.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The question of whether there are biological differences between male and female brains is a fraught one, and political positions and prior expectations seem to have a strong influence on the interpretation of scientific data in this field. This question is relevant to issues of gender differences in the prevalence of psychiatric conditions, including autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), Tourette's syndrome, schizophrenia, dyslexia, depression, and eating disorders. Understanding how gender influences vulnerability to these conditions is significant. Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) provides a non-invasive method to investigate brain microstructure and the integrity of anatomical connectivity. Generalized q-sampling imaging (GQI) has been proposed to characterize complicated fiber patterns and distinguish fiber orientations, providing an opportunity for more accurate, higher-order descriptions through the water diffusion process. Therefore, we aimed to investigate differences in the brain's structural network between teenage males and females using GQI. This study included 59 (i.e., 33 males and 26 females) age- and education-matched subjects (age range: 13 to 14 years). The structural connectome was obtained by graph theoretical and network-based statistical (NBS) analyses. Our findings show that teenage male brains exhibit better intrahemispheric communication, and teenage female brains exhibit better interhemispheric communication. Our results also suggest that the network organization of teenage male brains is more local, more segregated, and more similar to small-world networks than teenage female brains. We conclude that the use of an MRI study with a GQI-based structural connectomic approach like ours presents novel insights into network-based systems of the brain and provides a new piece of the puzzle regarding gender differences.

Indexed as

ConnectomeSex CharacteristicsAdolescentBrainDiffusion Magnetic Resonance ImagingFemaleHumansMaleGender differenceGeneralized q-sampling imaging (GQI)Graph theoretical analysisNetwork-based statistical (NBS) analysisStructural connectome

Identifiers

PMID28580294
PMCPMC5447512

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.