Cargando…

Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling

Regression dynamic causal modeling (rDCM) is a novel and computationally highly efficient method for inferring effective connectivity at the whole-brain level. While face and construct validity of rDCM have already been demonstrated, here we assessed its test-retest reliability—a test-theoretical pr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Frässle, Stefan, Stephan, Klaas E.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MIT Press 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8959103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35356192
http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/netn_a_00215
_version_ 1784677076048019456
author Frässle, Stefan
Stephan, Klaas E.
author_facet Frässle, Stefan
Stephan, Klaas E.
author_sort Frässle, Stefan
collection PubMed
description Regression dynamic causal modeling (rDCM) is a novel and computationally highly efficient method for inferring effective connectivity at the whole-brain level. While face and construct validity of rDCM have already been demonstrated, here we assessed its test-retest reliability—a test-theoretical property of particular importance for clinical applications—together with group-level consistency of connection-specific estimates and consistency of whole-brain connectivity patterns over sessions. Using the Human Connectome Project dataset for eight different paradigms (tasks and rest) and two different parcellation schemes, we found that rDCM provided highly consistent connectivity estimates at the group level across sessions. Second, while test-retest reliability was limited when averaging over all connections (range of mean intraclass correlation coefficient 0.24–0.42 over tasks), reliability increased with connection strength, with stronger connections showing good to excellent test-retest reliability. Third, whole-brain connectivity patterns by rDCM allowed for identifying individual participants with high (and in some cases perfect) accuracy. Comparing the test-retest reliability of rDCM connectivity estimates with measures of functional connectivity, rDCM performed favorably—particularly when focusing on strong connections. Generally, for all methods and metrics, task-based connectivity estimates showed greater reliability than those from the resting state. Our results underscore the potential of rDCM for human connectomics and clinical applications.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8959103
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MIT Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89591032022-03-29 Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling Frässle, Stefan Stephan, Klaas E. Netw Neurosci Research Article Regression dynamic causal modeling (rDCM) is a novel and computationally highly efficient method for inferring effective connectivity at the whole-brain level. While face and construct validity of rDCM have already been demonstrated, here we assessed its test-retest reliability—a test-theoretical property of particular importance for clinical applications—together with group-level consistency of connection-specific estimates and consistency of whole-brain connectivity patterns over sessions. Using the Human Connectome Project dataset for eight different paradigms (tasks and rest) and two different parcellation schemes, we found that rDCM provided highly consistent connectivity estimates at the group level across sessions. Second, while test-retest reliability was limited when averaging over all connections (range of mean intraclass correlation coefficient 0.24–0.42 over tasks), reliability increased with connection strength, with stronger connections showing good to excellent test-retest reliability. Third, whole-brain connectivity patterns by rDCM allowed for identifying individual participants with high (and in some cases perfect) accuracy. Comparing the test-retest reliability of rDCM connectivity estimates with measures of functional connectivity, rDCM performed favorably—particularly when focusing on strong connections. Generally, for all methods and metrics, task-based connectivity estimates showed greater reliability than those from the resting state. Our results underscore the potential of rDCM for human connectomics and clinical applications. MIT Press 2022-02-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8959103/ /pubmed/35356192 http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/netn_a_00215 Text en © 2021 Massachusetts Institute of Technology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For a full description of the license, please visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research Article
Frässle, Stefan
Stephan, Klaas E.
Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
title Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
title_full Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
title_fullStr Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
title_full_unstemmed Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
title_short Test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
title_sort test-retest reliability of regression dynamic causal modeling
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8959103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35356192
http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/netn_a_00215
work_keys_str_mv AT frasslestefan testretestreliabilityofregressiondynamiccausalmodeling
AT stephanklaase testretestreliabilityofregressiondynamiccausalmodeling