Back

Brain Size: To Adjust or Not Adjust? It's Not a Matter of If, but How

Brzezinski-Rittner, A.; Moqadam, R.; Zeighami, Y.; Dadar, M.

2025-09-29 neurology
10.1101/2025.09.21.25336298 medRxiv
Show abstract

Total intracranial volume (TIV) is a major confounding factor in neuroimaging studies, particularly when studying sex differences in the brain. Different methods have been proposed to adjust for this effect, however, their impact has not been directly studied and compared. In this study, we sought to evaluate the impact of four most commonly used adjustment methods in the literature on the estimations of neuroanatomical sex differences. These methods included: the proportions method, the residuals method, the power corrected proportions method, and adding TIV as a covariate in a regression analysis. Leveraging data from the UK Biobank, we employed a matching approach to devise a gold standard as reference for comparing these methods. To achieve this, we matched the male and female participants based on age and TIV to remove the impact of TIV differences between sexes. We further modeled aging trajectories at the regional level, vertexwise, and voxelwise, using raw and adjusted values, and compared the obtained estimates against the gold standard. We found that across different metrics, adding TIV as a covariate was the best-performing method for removing the effect of TIV, in terms of the correlation between the estimates of the different subsamples and the gold standard as well as the degree of estimation bias. Furthermore, we showed that the commonly used smoothing of the morphometric measures can result in biased estimation of sex differences in these measures. Finally, we showed that while small in effect size, there still remains some neuroanatomically specific uncorrected effects for all adjustment methods.

Matching journals

The top 2 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Human Brain Mapping
295 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
45.2%
2
NeuroImage
813 papers in training set
Top 2%
5.3%
50% of probability mass above
3
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.3%
4
Neurobiology of Aging
95 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
4.0%
5
Imaging Neuroscience
242 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
3.9%
6
NeuroImage: Clinical
132 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.0%
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 48%
2.3%
8
Neuroinformatics
40 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
9
Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring
38 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.3%
10
Brain Structure and Function
83 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
11
Brain Communications
147 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
12
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 62%
1.0%
13
Alzheimer's & Dementia
143 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.0%
14
Alzheimer's Research & Therapy
52 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
15
Frontiers in Neuroscience
223 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
16
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 55%
0.8%
17
GeroScience
97 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
18
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
19
Brain and Behavior
37 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
20
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
21
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
22
Aging Cell
144 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
23
European Journal of Neuroscience
168 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%