From nodes to networks: How methods for defining nodes influence inferences regarding network interactions

Brain connectivity and academic skills in English learners

English learners (ELs) are a rapidly growing population in schools in the United States with limited experience and proficiency in English. To better understand the path for EL's academic success in school, it is important to understand how EL's brain systems are used for academic learning in English. We studied, in a cohort of Hispanic middle-schoolers (n = 45, 22F) with limited English proficiency and a wide range of reading and math abilities, brain network properties related to academic abilities. We applied a method for localizing brain regions of interest (ROIs) that are group-constrained, yet individually specific, to test how resting state functional connectivity between regions that are important for academic learning (reading, math, and cognitive control regions) are related to academic abilities. ROIs were selected from task localizers probing reading and math skills in the same participants. We found that connectivity across all ROIs, as well as connectivity of just the cognitive control ROIs, were positively related to measures of reading skills but not math skills. This work suggests that cognitive control brain systems have a central role for reading in ELs. Our results also indicate that an individualized approach for localizing brain function may clarify brain-behavior relationships.

ALE meta-analysis, its role in node identification and the effects on estimates of local network organization

Functional connectivity analyses for task-based fMRI data are generally preceded by methods for identification of network nodes. As there is no general canonical approach to identifying network nodes, different identification techniques may exert different effects on inferences drawn regarding functional network properties. Here, we compared the impact of two different node identification techniques on estimates of local node importance (based on Degree Centrality, DC) in two working memory domains: verbal and visual. The two techniques compared were the commonly used Activation Likelihood Estimate (ALE) technique (with node locations based on data aggregation), against a hybrid technique, Experimentally Derived Estimation (EDE). In the latter, ALE was first used to isolate regions of interest; then participant-specific nodes were identified based on individual-participant local maxima. Time series were extracted at each node for each dataset and subsequently used in functional connectivity analysis to: (1) assess the impact of choice of technique on estimates of DC, and (2) assess the difference between the techniques in the ranking of nodes (based on DC) in the networks they produced. In both domains, we found a significant Technique by Node interaction, signifying that the two techniques yielded networks with different DC estimates. Moreover, for the majority of participants, node rankings were uncorrelated between the two techniques (85% for the verbal working memory task and 92% for the visual working memory task). The latter effect is direct evidence that the identification techniques produced different rankings at the level of individual participants. These results indicate that node choice in task-based fMRI data exerts downstream effects that will impact interpretation and reverse inference regarding brain function.

From nodes to networks: How methods for defining nodes influence inferences regarding network interactions

Functional connectivity (FC) analysis of fMRI data typically rests on prior identification of network nodes from activation profiles. We compared Activation Likelihood Estimate (ALE) and the Experimentally Derived Estimate (EDE) approaches to network node identification and functional inference for both verbal and visual forms of working memory. ALE arrives at canonical activation maxima that are assumed to reliably represent peaks of brain activity underlying a psychological process (e.g., working memory). By comparison, EDEs of activation maxima are typically derived from individual participant data, and are thus sensitive to individual participant activation profiles. Here, nodes were localized by both ALE and EDE methods for each participant, and subsequently extracted time series were compared using connectivity analysis. Two sets of significance tests were performed: (1) correlations computed between nodal time series of each method were compared, and (2) correlations computed between network edges (functional connections) of each network node pair were compared. Large proportions of edge correlations significantly differed between methods. ALE effectively summarizes working memory network node locations across studies and subjects, but the sensitivity to individual functional loci suggest that EDE methods provide individualized estimates of network connectivity. We suggest that a hybrid method incorporating both ALE and EDE is optimal for network inference.