Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35061657›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Individualized spatial network predictions using Siamese convolutional neural networks: A resting-state fMRI study of over 11,000 unaffected individuals.

Reihaneh Hassanzadeh, Rogers F Silva, Anees Abrol, Mustafa Salman, Anna Bonkhoff, Yuhui Du, Zening Fu, Thomas DeRamus, Eswar Damaraju, Bradley Baker and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

11 authors.

Reihaneh HassanzadehDepartment of Computer Science, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-8022-8619
Rogers F SilvaTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7271-1288
Anees AbrolTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Mustafa SalmanTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-3545-3195
Anna BonkhoffJ. Philip Kistler Stroke Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Yuhui DuTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Zening FuTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Thomas DeRamusTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-5774-2297
Eswar DamarajuTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Bradley BakerTri-Institutional Center for Translational Research in Neuroimaging and Data Science (TReNDS), Georgia State University, Georgia Institute of Technology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.
Vince D CalhounDepartment of Computer Science, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, United States of America.

Funding

Male/Female differences in psychosis and mood disorders:Dynamic imaging-genomic models for characterizing and predicting psychosis and mood dR01MH118695 · NIMH · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ADALI, TULAY, CALHOUN, VINCE D · 2019 to 2023
$3.8M
Flexible multivariate models for linking multi-scale connectome and genome data in Alzheimer's disease and related disordersRF1AG063153 · NIA · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI CALHOUN, VINCE D, LIU, JINGYU · 2019 to 2020
$3.5M
Medical Research Council MC_PC_17228Medical Research Council MC_QA137853NIA NIH HHS RF1 AG063153NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH118695
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individuals can be characterized in a population according to their brain measurements and activity, given the inter-subject variability in brain anatomy, structure-function relationships, or life experience. Many neuroimaging studies have demonstrated the potential of functional network connectivity patterns estimated from resting functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to discriminate groups and predict information about individual subjects. However, the predictive signal present in the spatial heterogeneity of brain connectivity networks is yet to be extensively studied. In this study, we investigate, for the first time, the use of pairwise-relationships between resting-state independent spatial maps to characterize individuals. To do this, we develop a deep Siamese framework comprising three-dimensional convolution neural networks for contrastive learning based on individual-level spatial maps estimated via a fully automated fMRI independent component analysis approach. The proposed framework evaluates whether pairs of spatial networks (e.g., visual network and auditory network) are capable of subject identification and assesses the spatial variability in different network pairs' predictive power in an extensive whole-brain analysis. Our analysis on nearly 12,000 unaffected individuals from the UK Biobank study demonstrates that the proposed approach can discriminate subjects with an accuracy of up to 88% for a single network pair on the test set (best model, after several runs), and 82% average accuracy at the subcortical domain level, notably the highest average domain level accuracy attained. Further investigation of our network's learned features revealed a higher spatial variability in predictive accuracy among younger brains and significantly higher discriminative power among males. In sum, the relationship among spatial networks appears to be both informative and discriminative of individuals and should be studied further as putative brain-based biomarkers.

Indexed as

BrainMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeural Networks, ComputerAdultAgedBrain MappingFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNerve NetRest

Identifiers

PMID35061657
PMCPMC8782493

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
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.