학술논문
Global multi‐center and multi‐modal magnetic resonance imaging study of obsessive‐compulsive disorder: Harmonization and monitoring of protocols in healthy volunteers and phantoms
Document Type
article
Author
Petra J. W. Pouwels; Chris Vriend; Feng Liu; Niels T. deJoode; Maria C. G. Otaduy; Bruno Pastorello; Frances C. Robertson; Ganesan Venkatasubramanian; Jonathan Ipser; Seonjoo Lee; Marcelo C. Batistuzzo; Marcelo Q. Hoexter; Christine Lochner; Euripedes C. Miguel; Janardhanan C. Narayanaswamy; Rashmi Rao; Y. C. Janardhan Reddy; Roseli G. Shavitt; Karthik Sheshachala; Dan J. Stein; Anton J. L. M. vanBalkom; Melanie Wall; Helen Blair Simpson; Odile A. van denHeuvel
Source
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research, Vol 32, Iss 1, Pp n/a-n/a (2023)
Subject
Language
English
ISSN
1557-0657
1049-8931
1049-8931
Abstract
Abstract Objectives We describe the harmonized MRI acquisition and quality assessment of an ongoing global OCD study, with the aim to translate representative, well‐powered neuroimaging findings in neuropsychiatric research to worldwide populations. Methods We report on T1‐weighted structural MRI, resting‐state functional MRI, and multi‐shell diffusion‐weighted imaging of 140 healthy participants (28 per site), two traveling controls, and regular phantom scans. Results Human image quality measures (IQMs) and outcome measures showed smaller within‐site variation than between‐site variation. Outcome measures were less variable than IQMs, especially for the traveling controls. Phantom IQMs were stable regarding geometry, SNR, and mean diffusivity, while fMRI fluctuation was more variable between sites. Conclusions Variation in IQMs persists, even for an a priori harmonized data acquisition protocol, but after pre‐processing they have less of an impact on the outcome measures. Continuous monitoring IQMs per site is valuable to detect potential artifacts and outliers. The inclusion of both cases and healthy participants at each site remains mandatory.