Back

Modeling of individual neurophysiological brain connectivity

Kulik, S. D.; Douw, L.; van Dellen, E.; Steenwijk, M. D.; Geurts, J. J.; Stam, K. J.; Hillebrand, A.; Schoonheim, M. M.; Tewarie, P.

2022-03-02 neuroscience
10.1101/2022.03.02.482608 bioRxiv
Show abstract

IntroductionComputational models are often used to assess how functional connectivity (FC) patterns emerge from neuronal population dynamics and anatomical connections in the brain. However, group averaged data is often used in this context and it remains unclear whether individual predictions of FC patterns using this approach can be made. Here, we assess the value of using individualized structural data for simulation of individual whole-brain FC. MethodsThe Jansen and Rit neural mass model was employed, where masses were coupled using individual structural connectivity (SC) obtained from diffusion weighted imaging. Simulated FC was correlated to individual magnetoencephalography-derived empirical FC. FC was estimated using both phase-based (phase lag index (PLI), phase locking value (PLV)) and amplitude-based (amplitude envelope correlation (AEC)) metrics to analyze the goodness-of-fit of different metrics for individual predictions. Prediction of individual FC was compared against the prediction of group averaged FC. We further tested whether SC of a different participant could equally well predict a participants FC pattern. ResultsThe AEC provided a significantly better match between individually simulated and empirical FC than phase-based metrics. Simulations with individual SC provided higher correlations between simulated and empirical FC compared to using the group-averaged SC. However, using SC from other participants resulted in similar correlations between simulated and empirical FC compared to using participants own SC. DiscussionThis work underlines the added value of FC simulations based on individual instead of group-averaged SC, and could aid in a better understanding of mechanisms underlying individual functional network trajectories in neurological disease. Impact statementIn this work, we investigated how well individual empirical functional connectivity can be simulated using the individuals structural connectivity matrix combined with neural mass modeling. Our research highlights the potential added value of using individual simulations of functional connectivity, and could aid in a better understanding of mechanisms underlying individual functional network trajectories in neurological disease. Moreover, individualized prediction of disease trajectories could enhance patient care and may provide better treatment options.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Network Neuroscience
116 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.7%
2
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
14.4%
3
Brain Connectivity
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.4%
4
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 1%
10.1%
50% of probability mass above
5
Neuroinformatics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
6
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.6%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 37%
3.6%
8
eneuro
389 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.9%
9
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 15%
1.8%
10
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.8%
11
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 54%
1.7%
12
Journal of Neural Engineering
197 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
Brain Structure and Function
83 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.7%
14
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.3%
15
Frontiers in Neuroimaging
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
16
Brain Sciences
52 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
17
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.1%
18
Frontiers in Psychiatry
83 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.9%
19
Frontiers in Neuroinformatics
38 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
0.9%
20
Journal of Neuroscience Methods
106 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Brain Topography
23 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
22
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
23
Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience
53 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%