Connectivity analyses and computational modeling of human brain function from fMRI data frequently require the specification of regions of interests (ROIs). Several analyses have relied on atlases derived from anatomical or cyto-architectonic boundaries to specify these ROIs, yet the suitability of atlases for resting state functional connectivity studies has yet to be established. This paper introduces a data-driven method for generating an ROI atlas by parcellating whole brain resting-state fMRI data into spatially coherent regions of homogeneous functional connectivity. Several clustering statistics are used to compare methodological trade-offs as well as determine an adequate number of clusters. Additionally, we evaluate the suitability of the parcellation atlas against four ROI atlases (Talairach and Tournoux, Harvard-Oxford, Eickoff-Zilles, and Automatic Anatomical Labeling) and a random parcellation approach. The evaluated anatomical atlases exhibit poor ROI homogeneity and do not accurately reproduce functional connectivity patterns present at the voxel scale. In general, the proposed functional and random parcellations perform equivalently for most of the metrics evaluated. ROI size and hence the number of ROIs in a parcellation had the greatest impact on their suitability for functional connectivity analysis. With 200 or fewer ROIs, the resulting parcellations consist of ROIs with anatomic homology, and thus offer increased interpretability. Parcellation results containing higher numbers of ROIs (600 or 1000) most accurately represent functional connectivity patterns present at the voxel scale and are preferable when interpretability can be sacrificed for accuracy. The resulting atlases and clustering software have been made publicly available at: http://www.nitrc.org/projects/cluster_roi/.

Functional connectomics is one of the most rapidly expanding areas of neuroimaging research. Yet, concerns remain regarding the use of resting-state fMRI (R-fMRI) to characterize inter-individual variation in the functional connectome. In particular, recent findings that “micro” head movements can introduce artifactual inter-individual and group-related differences in R-fMRI metrics have raised concerns. Here, we first build on prior demonstrations of regional variation in the magnitude of framewise displacements associated with a given head movement, by providing a comprehensive voxel-based examination of the impact of motion on the BOLD signal (i.e., motion-BOLD relationships). Positive motion-BOLD relationships were detected in primary and supplementary motor areas, particularly in low motion datasets. Negative motion-BOLD relationships were most prominent in prefrontal regions, and expanded throughout the brain in high motion datasets (e.g., children). Scrubbing of volumes with FD > 0.2 effectively removed negative but not positive correlations; these findings suggest that positive relationships may reflect neural origins of motion while negative relationships are likely to originate from motion artifact. We also examined the ability of motion correction strategies to eliminate artifactual differences related to motion among individuals and between groups for a broad array of voxel-wise R-fMRI metrics. Residual relationships between motion and the examined R-fMRI metrics remained for all correction approaches, underscoring the need to covary motion effects at the group-level. Notably, global signal regression reduced relationships between motion and inter-individual differences in correlation-based R-fMRI metrics; Z-standardization (mean-centering and variance normalization) of subject-level maps for R-fMRI metrics prior to group-level analyses demonstrated similar advantages. Finally, our test-retest (TRT) analyses revealed significant motion effects on TRT reliability for R-fMRI metrics. Generally, motion compromised reliability of R-fMRI metrics, with the exception of those based on frequency characteristics – particularly, amplitude of low frequency fluctuations (ALFF). The implications of our findings for decision-making regarding the assessment and correction of motion are discussed, as are insights into potential differences among volume-based metrics of motion.

The development of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) techniques has defined modern neuroimaging. Since its inception, tens of thousands of studies using techniques such as functional MRI and diffusion weighted imaging have allowed for the non-invasive study of the brain. Despite the fact that MRI is routinely used to obtain data for neuroscience research, there has been no widely adopted standard for organizing and describing the data collected in an imaging experiment. This renders sharing and reusing data (within or between labs) difficult if not impossible and unnecessarily complicates the application of automatic pipelines and quality assurance protocols. To solve this problem, we have developed the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS), a standard for organizing and describing MRI datasets. The BIDS standard uses file formats compatible with existing software, unifies the majority of practices already common in the field, and captures the metadata necessary for most common data processing operations.

The National Institute of Mental Health strategic plan for advancing psychiatric neuroscience calls for an acceleration of discovery and the delineation of developmental trajectories for risk and resilience across the lifespan. To attain these objectives, sufficiently powered datasets with broad and deep phenotypic characterization, state-of-the-art neuroimaging, and genetic samples must be generated and made openly available to the scientific community. The enhanced Nathan Kline Institute-Rockland Sample (NKI-RS) is a response to this need. NKI-RS is an ongoing, institutionally centered endeavor aimed at creating a large-scale (N > 1000), deeply phenotyped, community-ascertained, lifespan sample (ages 6–85 years old) with advanced neuroimaging and genetics. These data will be publically shared, openly, and prospectively (i.e., on a weekly basis). Herein, we describe the conceptual basis of the NKI-RS, including study design, sampling considerations, and steps to synchronize phenotypic and neuroimaging assessment. Additionally, we describe our process for sharing the data with the scientific community while protecting participant confidentiality, maintaining an adequate database, and certifying data integrity. The pilot phase of the NKI-RS, including challenges in recruiting, characterizing, imaging, and sharing data, is discussed while also explaining how this experience informed the final design of the enhanced NKI-RS. It is our hope that familiarity with the conceptual underpinnings of the enhanced NKI-RS will facilitate harmonization with future data collection efforts aimed at advancing psychiatric neuroscience and nosology.

No abstract

Resting-state functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (R-fMRI) holds the promise to reveal functional biomarkers of neuropsychiatric disorders. However, extracting such biomarkers is challenging for complex multi-faceted neuropathologies, such as autism spectrum disorders. Large multi-site datasets increase sample sizes to compensate for this complexity, at the cost of uncontrolled heterogeneity. This heterogeneity raises new challenges, akin to those face in realistic diagnostic applications. Here, we demonstrate the feasibility of inter-site classification of neuropsychiatric status, with an application to the Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE) database, a large (N=871) multi-site autism dataset. For this purpose, we investigate pipelines that extract the most predictive biomarkers from the data. These R-fMRI pipelines build participant-specific connectomes from functionally-defined brain areas. Connectomes are then compared across participants to learn patterns of connectivity that differentiate typical controls from individuals with autism. We predict this neuropsychiatric status for participants from the same acquisition sites or different, unseen, ones. Good choices of methods for the various steps of the pipeline lead to 67% prediction accuracy on the full ABIDE data, which is significantly better than previously reported results. We perform extensive validation on multiple subsets of the data defined by different inclusion criteria. These enables detailed analysis of the factors contributing to successful connectome-based prediction. First, prediction accuracy improves as we include more subjects, up to the maximum amount of subjects available. Second, the definition of functional brain areas is of paramount importance for biomarker discovery: brain areas extracted from large R-fMRI datasets outperform reference atlases in the classification tasks.

At macroscopic scales, the human connectome is composed of anatomically distinct brain areas, the structural pathways connecting them, and their functional interactions. Successful annotation of phenotypic associations with variation in the connectome and cataloguing of neurophenotypes promise to transform our understanding of the human brain. This review provides a survey of magnetic resonance imaging-based measurements of functional and structural connectivity. We highlight emerging areas of development and inquiry, and emphasize the importance of integrating structural and functional perspectives on brain architecture.

As researchers increase their efforts to characterize variations in the functional connectome across studies and individuals, concerns about the many sources of nuisance variation present and their impact on resting state fMRI (R-fMRI) measures continue to grow. Although substantial within-site variation can exist, efforts to aggregate data across multiple sites such as the 1000 Functional Connectomes Project (FCP) and International Neuroimaging Data-sharing Initiative (INDI) datasets amplify these concerns. The present work draws upon standardization approaches commonly used in the microarray gene expression literature, and to a lesser extent recent imaging studies, and compares them with respect to their impact on relationships between common R-fMRI measures and nuisance variables (e.g., imaging site, motion), as well as phenotypic variables of interest (age, sex). Standardization approaches differed with regard to whether they were applied post-hoc vs. during pre-processing, and at the individual vs. group level; additionally they varied in whether they addressed additive effects vs. additive + multiplicative effects, and were parametric vs. non-parametric. While all standardization approaches were effective at reducing undesirable relationships with nuisance variables, post-hoc approaches were generally more effective than global signal regression (GSR). Across approaches, correction for additive effects (global mean) appeared to be more important than for multiplicative effects (global SD) for all R-fMRI measures, with the exception of amplitude of low frequency fluctuations (ALFF). Group-level post-hoc standardizations for mean-centering and variance-standardization were found to be advantageous in their ability to avoid the introduction of artifactual relationships with standardization parameters; though results between individual and group-level post-hoc approaches were highly similar overall. While post-hoc standardization procedures drastically increased test–retest (TRT) reliability for ALFF, modest reductions were observed for other measures after post-hoc standardizations—a phenomena likely attributable to the separation of voxel-wise from global differences among subjects (global mean and SD demonstrated moderate TRT reliability for these measures). Finally, the present work calls into question previous observations of increased anatomical specificity for GSR over mean centering, and draws attention to the near equivalence of global and gray matter signal regression.