Giacomo Serra, Francesca Mainas, Bruno Golosio, Alessandra Retico, Piernicola Oliva
{"title":"多中心数据协调在ASD/TD分类中的作用。","authors":"Giacomo Serra, Francesca Mainas, Bruno Golosio, Alessandra Retico, Piernicola Oliva","doi":"10.1186/s40708-023-00210-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Machine Learning (ML) is nowadays an essential tool in the analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data, in particular in the identification of brain correlates in neurological and neurodevelopmental disorders. ML requires datasets of appropriate size for training, which in neuroimaging are typically obtained collecting data from multiple acquisition centers. However, analyzing large multicentric datasets can introduce bias due to differences between acquisition centers. ComBat harmonization is commonly used to address batch effects, but it can lead to data leakage when the entire dataset is used to estimate model parameters. In this study, structural and functional MRI data from the Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE) collection were used to classify subjects with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) compared to Typical Developing controls (TD). We compared the classical approach (external harmonization) in which harmonization is performed before train/test split, with an harmonization calculated only on the train set (internal harmonization), and with the dataset with no harmonization. The results showed that harmonization using the whole dataset achieved higher discrimination performance, while non-harmonized data and harmonization using only the train set showed similar results, for both structural and connectivity features. We also showed that the higher performances of the external harmonization are not due to larger size of the sample for the estimation of the model and hence these improved performance with the entire dataset may be ascribed to data leakage. In order to prevent this leakage, it is recommended to define the harmonization model solely using the train set.</p>","PeriodicalId":37465,"journal":{"name":"Brain Informatics","volume":"10 1","pages":"32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10676338/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of data harmonization of multicentric dataset in ASD/TD classification.\",\"authors\":\"Giacomo Serra, Francesca Mainas, Bruno Golosio, Alessandra Retico, Piernicola Oliva\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40708-023-00210-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Machine Learning (ML) is nowadays an essential tool in the analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data, in particular in the identification of brain correlates in neurological and neurodevelopmental disorders. ML requires datasets of appropriate size for training, which in neuroimaging are typically obtained collecting data from multiple acquisition centers. However, analyzing large multicentric datasets can introduce bias due to differences between acquisition centers. ComBat harmonization is commonly used to address batch effects, but it can lead to data leakage when the entire dataset is used to estimate model parameters. In this study, structural and functional MRI data from the Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE) collection were used to classify subjects with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) compared to Typical Developing controls (TD). We compared the classical approach (external harmonization) in which harmonization is performed before train/test split, with an harmonization calculated only on the train set (internal harmonization), and with the dataset with no harmonization. The results showed that harmonization using the whole dataset achieved higher discrimination performance, while non-harmonized data and harmonization using only the train set showed similar results, for both structural and connectivity features. We also showed that the higher performances of the external harmonization are not due to larger size of the sample for the estimation of the model and hence these improved performance with the entire dataset may be ascribed to data leakage. In order to prevent this leakage, it is recommended to define the harmonization model solely using the train set.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brain Informatics\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10676338/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brain Informatics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40708-023-00210-x\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Computer Science\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Informatics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40708-023-00210-x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Computer Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effect of data harmonization of multicentric dataset in ASD/TD classification.
Machine Learning (ML) is nowadays an essential tool in the analysis of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data, in particular in the identification of brain correlates in neurological and neurodevelopmental disorders. ML requires datasets of appropriate size for training, which in neuroimaging are typically obtained collecting data from multiple acquisition centers. However, analyzing large multicentric datasets can introduce bias due to differences between acquisition centers. ComBat harmonization is commonly used to address batch effects, but it can lead to data leakage when the entire dataset is used to estimate model parameters. In this study, structural and functional MRI data from the Autism Brain Imaging Data Exchange (ABIDE) collection were used to classify subjects with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) compared to Typical Developing controls (TD). We compared the classical approach (external harmonization) in which harmonization is performed before train/test split, with an harmonization calculated only on the train set (internal harmonization), and with the dataset with no harmonization. The results showed that harmonization using the whole dataset achieved higher discrimination performance, while non-harmonized data and harmonization using only the train set showed similar results, for both structural and connectivity features. We also showed that the higher performances of the external harmonization are not due to larger size of the sample for the estimation of the model and hence these improved performance with the entire dataset may be ascribed to data leakage. In order to prevent this leakage, it is recommended to define the harmonization model solely using the train set.
期刊介绍:
Brain Informatics is an international, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary open-access journal published under the brand SpringerOpen, which provides a unique platform for researchers and practitioners to disseminate original research on computational and informatics technologies related to brain. This journal addresses the computational, cognitive, physiological, biological, physical, ecological and social perspectives of brain informatics. It also welcomes emerging information technologies and advanced neuro-imaging technologies, such as big data analytics and interactive knowledge discovery related to various large-scale brain studies and their applications. This journal will publish high-quality original research papers, brief reports and critical reviews in all theoretical, technological, clinical and interdisciplinary studies that make up the field of brain informatics and its applications in brain-machine intelligence, brain-inspired intelligent systems, mental health and brain disorders, etc. The scope of papers includes the following five tracks: Track 1: Cognitive and Computational Foundations of Brain Science Track 2: Human Information Processing Systems Track 3: Brain Big Data Analytics, Curation and Management Track 4: Informatics Paradigms for Brain and Mental Health Research Track 5: Brain-Machine Intelligence and Brain-Inspired Computing