2018
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.1031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential patterns of age‐related cortical and subcortical functional connectivity in 6‐to‐10 year old children: A connectome‐wide association study

Abstract: IntroductionTypical brain development is characterized by specific patterns of maturation of functional networks. Cortico‐cortical connectivity generally increases, whereas subcortico‐cortical connections often decrease. Little is known about connectivity changes amongst different subcortical regions in typical development.MethodsThis study examined age‐ and gender‐related differences in functional connectivity between and within cortical and subcortical regions using two different approaches. The participants… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 83 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These include decreases, on average, in gray matter volume (Bethlehem et al, 2022; Lenroot et al, 2007), cortical thickness (Tamnes et al, 2017; Wierenga et al, 2014b), gray-to-white matter contrast (Norbom et al, 2019; Paus et al, 2001), mean diffusivity (Schmithorst and Yuan, 2010), and transverse diffusivity (Asato et al, 2010) In addition, we also replicated increases in white matter volume, fractional anisotropy (Lebel and Deoni, 2018; Schmithorst and Yuan, 2010; Tamnes et al, 2018), white and gray matter isotropic intracellular diffusion (Palmer et al, 2022), white matter directional intracellular diffusion (ibid), and within-network functional connectivity (Fair et al, 2007; Satterthwaite et al, 2012). Also consistent with prior findings, we identified both increases and decreases in gray matter directional intracellular diffusion (Palmer et al, 2022), subcortical-network functional connectivity (Duijvenvoorde et al, 2019; Ji et al, 2019; Langen et al, 2018), and BOLD variance (Nomi et al, 2017; Wang et al, 2021), depending on the brain region or network. Larger decreases in gray matter volume were identified in parietal regions than in frontal, temporal, or occipital regions, consistent with prior findings (Lenroot et al, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…These include decreases, on average, in gray matter volume (Bethlehem et al, 2022; Lenroot et al, 2007), cortical thickness (Tamnes et al, 2017; Wierenga et al, 2014b), gray-to-white matter contrast (Norbom et al, 2019; Paus et al, 2001), mean diffusivity (Schmithorst and Yuan, 2010), and transverse diffusivity (Asato et al, 2010) In addition, we also replicated increases in white matter volume, fractional anisotropy (Lebel and Deoni, 2018; Schmithorst and Yuan, 2010; Tamnes et al, 2018), white and gray matter isotropic intracellular diffusion (Palmer et al, 2022), white matter directional intracellular diffusion (ibid), and within-network functional connectivity (Fair et al, 2007; Satterthwaite et al, 2012). Also consistent with prior findings, we identified both increases and decreases in gray matter directional intracellular diffusion (Palmer et al, 2022), subcortical-network functional connectivity (Duijvenvoorde et al, 2019; Ji et al, 2019; Langen et al, 2018), and BOLD variance (Nomi et al, 2017; Wang et al, 2021), depending on the brain region or network. Larger decreases in gray matter volume were identified in parietal regions than in frontal, temporal, or occipital regions, consistent with prior findings (Lenroot et al, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…For example, cortical gray matter thickness peaks in children and generally decreases after adolescence . Synaptogenesis and arborization can result in increasing cross talk between brain regions . After adolescence, the localized brain functions lose specialized characteristics, but other regions provide something useful to neutralize the disruption.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While computing connectivity profiles to be hyperaligned, it is often desirable to use individualized connectivity targets to account for topographic idiosyncrasies in target regions. Individualized connectivity targets can be generated with individualized parcellations (Glasser et al, 2016; Langen et al, 2018; Kong et al, 2019, 2021, 2023; Anderson et al, 2021) or by iterating the hyperalignment algorithm (Busch et al, 2021; Jiahui et al, 2023). In our implementation for this study, we used parcels from the Glasser cortical parcellation (Glasser et al, 2016) as the cortical fields and targets to be hyperaligned.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%