Search

• Global network metrics are used to measure organizational properties of the brain. • Many metrics are highly correlated with each other and with topology-free metrics. • Network sparsity and variation in edge weights may yield greater independence between metrics. Graph-theoretic metrics derived from neuroimaging data have been heralded as powerful tools for uncovering neural mechanisms of psychological traits, psychiatric disorders, and neurodegenerative diseases. In N = 8,185 human structural connectomes from UK Biobank, we examined the extent to which 11 commonly-used global graph-theoretic metrics index distinct versus overlapping information with respect to interindividual differences in brain organization. Using unthresholded, FA-weighted networks we found that all metrics other than Participation Coefficient were highly intercorrelated, both with each other (mean | r| = 0.788) and with a topologically-naïve summary index of brain structure (mean edge weight; mean | r| = 0.873). In a series of sensitivity analyses, we found that overlap between metrics is influenced by the sparseness of the network and the magnitude of variation in edge weights. Simulation analyses representing a range of population network structures indicated that individual differences in global graph metrics may be intrinsically difficult to separate from mean edge weight. In particular, Closeness, Characteristic Path Length, Global Efficiency, Clustering Coefficient, and Small Worldness were nearly perfectly collinear with one another (mean | r| = 0.939) and with mean edge weight (mean | r| = 0.952) across all observed and simulated conditions. Global graph-theoretic measures are valuable for their ability to distill a high-dimensional system of neural connections into summary indices of brain organization, but they may be of more limited utility when the goal is to index separable components of interindividual variation in specific properties of the human structural connectome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Developed a model-based reproducibility index for large-scale high-throughput MRI-based studies. • Provided an analytical tool to evaluate the sample size necessary for achieving a desirable model-based reproducibility. • Model-based reproducibility >0.99 was observed for a few large sample size analyses. • Both sample size and study-specific experimental factors play important roles in model-based reproducibility assessment. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) technology has been increasingly used in neuroscience studies. Reproducibility of statistically significant findings generated by MRI-based studies, especially association studies (phenotype vs. MRI metric) and task-induced brain activation, has been recently heavily debated. However, most currently available reproducibility measures depend on thresholds for the test statistics and cannot be use to evaluate overall study reproducibility. It is also crucial to elucidate the relationship between overall study reproducibility and sample size in an experimental design. In this study, we proposed a model-based reproducibility index to quantify reproducibility which could be used in large-scale high-throughput MRI-based studies including both association studies and task-induced brain activation. We performed the model-based reproducibility assessments for a few association studies and task-induced brain activation by using several recent large sMRI/fMRI databases. For large sample size association studies between brain structure/function features and some basic physiological phenotypes (i.e. Sex, BMI), we demonstrated that the model-based reproducibility of these studies is more than 0.99. For MID task activation, similar results could be observed. Furthermore, we proposed a model-based analytical tool to evaluate minimal sample size for the purpose of achieving a desirable model-based reproducibility. Additionally, we evaluated the model-based reproducibility of gray matter volume (GMV) changes for UK Biobank (UKB) vs. Parkinson Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI) and UK Biobank (UKB) vs. Human Connectome Project (HCP). We demonstrated that both sample size and study-specific experimental factors play important roles in the model-based reproducibility assessments for different experiments. In summary, a systematic assessment of reproducibility is fundamental and important in the current large-scale high-throughput MRI-based studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]