ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025
Toward Robust Neuroanatomical Normative Models: Influence of Sample Size and Covariates Distributions.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Normative models are increasingly used to characterize individual-level brain deviations in neuroimaging studies, but their performance depends heavily on the reference sample used for training or adaptation. In this study, we systematically investigated how sample size and covariate composition of the reference cohort influence model fit, deviation estimates, and clinical readouts in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Using a discovery dataset (OASIS-3, n = 1032), we trained models on healthy control (HC), subsamples ranging from 5 to 600 individuals, while varying age and sex distributions to simulate biases in reference populations. We further assessed the use of adaptive transfer learning by pre-training models on the UK Biobank (n = 42,747) and adapting them to the clinical dataset applying the same sub-sampling strategies. We evaluated model performance on a fixed HC test set and quantified deviation score errors, outlier detection, and classification accuracy in both the HC test set and the AD cohort. The findings were replicated in an external validation sample (AIBL, n = 463). Across all settings, model performance improved with increasing sample size, but demographic alignment of the covariates, particularly in age, was essential for reliable deviation estimates. Models trained directly within the dataset achieved stable fit with approximately 200 HCs, while adapted models reached comparable performance with as few as 50 individuals when pre-trained on large-scale data. These results show that robust individual-level modeling can be achieved using moderately sized but demographically matched cohorts, supporting broader application of normative modeling in ageing and neurodegeneration research.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.