↓ Skip to main content

Network, Anatomical, and Non-Imaging Measures for the Prediction of ADHD Diagnosis in Individual Subjects

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
51 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
145 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Network, Anatomical, and Non-Imaging Measures for the Prediction of ADHD Diagnosis in Individual Subjects
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2012.00078
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jason W. Bohland, Sara Saperstein, Francisco Pereira, Jérémy Rapin, Leo Grady

Abstract

Brain imaging methods have long held promise as diagnostic aids for neuropsychiatric conditions with complex behavioral phenotypes such as Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. This promise has largely been unrealized, at least partly due to the heterogeneity of clinical populations and the small sample size of many studies. A large, multi-center dataset provided by the ADHD-200 Consortium affords new opportunities to test methods for individual diagnosis based on MRI-observable structural brain attributes and functional interactions observable from resting-state fMRI. In this study, we systematically calculated a large set of standard and new quantitative markers from individual subject datasets. These features (>12,000 per subject) consisted of local anatomical attributes such as cortical thickness and structure volumes, and both local and global resting-state network measures. Three methods were used to compute graphs representing interdependencies between activations in different brain areas, and a full set of network features was derived from each. Of these, features derived from the inverse of the time series covariance matrix, under an L1-norm regularization penalty, proved most powerful. Anatomical and network feature sets were used individually, and combined with non-imaging phenotypic features from each subject. Machine learning algorithms were used to rank attributes, and performance was assessed under cross-validation and on a separate test set of 168 subjects for a variety of feature set combinations. While non-imaging features gave highest performance in cross-validation, the addition of imaging features in sufficient numbers led to improved generalization to new data. Stratification by gender also proved to be a fruitful strategy to improve classifier performance. We describe the overall approach used, compare the predictive power of different classes of features, and describe the most impactful features in relation to the current literature.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 145 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Brazil 1 <1%
Israel 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Finland 1 <1%
Greece 1 <1%
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 135 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 29 20%
Researcher 29 20%
Student > Master 18 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 11 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 26 18%
Unknown 24 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 17%
Medicine and Dentistry 23 16%
Neuroscience 18 12%
Engineering 15 10%
Computer Science 12 8%
Other 24 17%
Unknown 29 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 July 2014.
All research outputs
#2,635,856
of 22,689,790 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#245
of 1,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,409
of 244,142 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#5
of 51 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,689,790 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 244,142 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 51 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.