Reproducible brain-wide association studies require thousands of individuals

Author:

Marek ScottORCID,Tervo-Clemmens BrendenORCID,Calabro Finnegan J.ORCID,Montez David F.,Kay Benjamin P.,Hatoum Alexander S.,Donohue Meghan Rose,Foran William,Miller Ryland L.,Hendrickson Timothy J.,Malone Stephen M.,Kandala Sridhar,Feczko Eric,Miranda-Dominguez Oscar,Graham Alice M.,Earl Eric A.ORCID,Perrone Anders J.,Cordova Michaela,Doyle OliviaORCID,Moore Lucille A.ORCID,Conan Gregory M.,Uriarte Johnny,Snider Kathy,Lynch Benjamin J.ORCID,Wilgenbusch James C.,Pengo Thomas,Tam AngelaORCID,Chen Jianzhong,Newbold Dillan J.,Zheng Annie,Seider Nicole A.ORCID,Van Andrew N.,Metoki Athanasia,Chauvin Roselyne J.ORCID,Laumann Timothy O.,Greene Deanna J.ORCID,Petersen Steven E.,Garavan Hugh,Thompson Wesley K.,Nichols Thomas E.ORCID,Yeo B. T. Thomas,Barch Deanna M.ORCID,Luna Beatriz,Fair Damien A.ORCID,Dosenbach Nico U. F.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has transformed our understanding of the human brain through well-replicated mapping of abilities to specific structures (for example, lesion studies) and functions1–3 (for example, task functional MRI (fMRI)). Mental health research and care have yet to realize similar advances from MRI. A primary challenge has been replicating associations between inter-individual differences in brain structure or function and complex cognitive or mental health phenotypes (brain-wide association studies (BWAS)). Such BWAS have typically relied on sample sizes appropriate for classical brain mapping4 (the median neuroimaging study sample size is about 25), but potentially too small for capturing reproducible brain–behavioural phenotype associations5,6. Here we used three of the largest neuroimaging datasets currently available—with a total sample size of around 50,000 individuals—to quantify BWAS effect sizes and reproducibility as a function of sample size. BWAS associations were smaller than previously thought, resulting in statistically underpowered studies, inflated effect sizes and replication failures at typical sample sizes. As sample sizes grew into the thousands, replication rates began to improve and effect size inflation decreased. More robust BWAS effects were detected for functional MRI (versus structural), cognitive tests (versus mental health questionnaires) and multivariate methods (versus univariate). Smaller than expected brain–phenotype associations and variability across population subsamples can explain widespread BWAS replication failures. In contrast to non-BWAS approaches with larger effects (for example, lesions, interventions and within-person), BWAS reproducibility requires samples with thousands of individuals.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Multidisciplinary

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3