体积匹配脑MRI对性别的分类

Q4 Neuroscience Neuroimage. Reports Pub Date : 2023-09-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ynirp.2023.100181
Matthis Ebel , Martin Domin , Nicola Neumann , Carsten Oliver Schmidt , Martin Lotze , Mario Stanke
{"title":"体积匹配脑MRI对性别的分类","authors":"Matthis Ebel ,&nbsp;Martin Domin ,&nbsp;Nicola Neumann ,&nbsp;Carsten Oliver Schmidt ,&nbsp;Martin Lotze ,&nbsp;Mario Stanke","doi":"10.1016/j.ynirp.2023.100181","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Sex differences in the size of specific brain structures have been extensively studied, but careful and reproducible statistical hypothesis testing to identify them produced overall small effect sizes and differences in brains of males and females. On the other hand, multivariate statistical or machine learning methods that analyze MR images of the whole brain have reported respectable accuracies for the task of distinguishing brains of males from brains of females. However, most existing studies lacked a careful control for brain volume differences between sexes and, if done, their accuracy often declined to 70% or below. This raises questions about the relevance of accuracies achieved without careful control of overall volume.</p><p>We examined how accurately sex can be classified from gray matter properties of the human brain when matching on overall brain volume. We tested, how robust machine learning classifiers are when predicting cross-cohort, i.e. when they are used on a different cohort than they were trained on. Furthermore, we studied how their accuracy depends on the size of the training set and attempted to identify brain regions relevant for successful classification. MRI data was used from two population-based data sets of 3298 mostly older adults from the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP) and 399 mostly younger adults from the Human Connectome Project (HCP), respectively. We benchmarked two multivariate methods, logistic regression and a 3D convolutional neural network.</p><p>We show that male and female brains of the same intracranial volume can be distinguished with &gt;92% accuracy with logistic regression on a dataset of 1166 matched individuals. The same model also reached 85% accuracy on a different cohort without retraining. The accuracy for both methods increased with the training cohort size up to and beyond 3000 individuals, suggesting that classifiers trained on smaller cohorts likely have an accuracy disadvantage. We found no single outstanding brain region necessary for successful classification, but important features appear rather distributed across the brain.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":74277,"journal":{"name":"Neuroimage. Reports","volume":"3 3","pages":"Article 100181"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classifying sex with volume-matched brain MRI\",\"authors\":\"Matthis Ebel ,&nbsp;Martin Domin ,&nbsp;Nicola Neumann ,&nbsp;Carsten Oliver Schmidt ,&nbsp;Martin Lotze ,&nbsp;Mario Stanke\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ynirp.2023.100181\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Sex differences in the size of specific brain structures have been extensively studied, but careful and reproducible statistical hypothesis testing to identify them produced overall small effect sizes and differences in brains of males and females. On the other hand, multivariate statistical or machine learning methods that analyze MR images of the whole brain have reported respectable accuracies for the task of distinguishing brains of males from brains of females. However, most existing studies lacked a careful control for brain volume differences between sexes and, if done, their accuracy often declined to 70% or below. This raises questions about the relevance of accuracies achieved without careful control of overall volume.</p><p>We examined how accurately sex can be classified from gray matter properties of the human brain when matching on overall brain volume. We tested, how robust machine learning classifiers are when predicting cross-cohort, i.e. when they are used on a different cohort than they were trained on. Furthermore, we studied how their accuracy depends on the size of the training set and attempted to identify brain regions relevant for successful classification. MRI data was used from two population-based data sets of 3298 mostly older adults from the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP) and 399 mostly younger adults from the Human Connectome Project (HCP), respectively. We benchmarked two multivariate methods, logistic regression and a 3D convolutional neural network.</p><p>We show that male and female brains of the same intracranial volume can be distinguished with &gt;92% accuracy with logistic regression on a dataset of 1166 matched individuals. The same model also reached 85% accuracy on a different cohort without retraining. The accuracy for both methods increased with the training cohort size up to and beyond 3000 individuals, suggesting that classifiers trained on smaller cohorts likely have an accuracy disadvantage. We found no single outstanding brain region necessary for successful classification, but important features appear rather distributed across the brain.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":74277,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Neuroimage. Reports\",\"volume\":\"3 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100181\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Neuroimage. Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666956023000260\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Neuroscience\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroimage. Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666956023000260","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Neuroscience","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

特定大脑结构大小的性别差异已经得到了广泛的研究,但仔细和可重复的统计假设测试来识别它们,会在男性和女性的大脑中产生总体较小的影响大小和差异。另一方面,分析整个大脑的MR图像的多元统计或机器学习方法已经报道了区分男性大脑和女性大脑的任务的相当高的准确性。然而,大多数现有的研究都缺乏对性别之间大脑容量差异的仔细控制,如果这样做了,它们的准确率往往会下降到70%或更低。这引发了人们对在没有仔细控制总音量的情况下实现的准确性的相关性的质疑。我们研究了当与大脑总体积相匹配时,从人脑的灰质特性中可以准确地对性别进行分类。我们测试了机器学习分类器在预测跨队列时的鲁棒性,即当它们在不同的队列中使用时。此外,我们研究了它们的准确性如何取决于训练集的大小,并试图识别与成功分类相关的大脑区域。MRI数据来自两个基于人群的数据集,分别为来自波美拉尼亚健康研究(SHIP)的3298名老年人和来自人类连接体项目(HCP)的399名年轻人。我们以两种多元方法为基准,即逻辑回归和三维卷积神经网络。我们发现具有相同颅内容积的男性和女性大脑可以通过>;在1166个匹配个体的数据集上,逻辑回归的准确率为92%。同样的模型在没有重新训练的情况下,在不同的队列中也达到了85%的准确率。随着训练队列规模达到或超过3000人,这两种方法的准确性都有所提高,这表明在较小队列上训练的分类器可能存在准确性劣势。我们没有发现成功分类所需的单个突出的大脑区域,但重要特征似乎分布在整个大脑中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Classifying sex with volume-matched brain MRI

Sex differences in the size of specific brain structures have been extensively studied, but careful and reproducible statistical hypothesis testing to identify them produced overall small effect sizes and differences in brains of males and females. On the other hand, multivariate statistical or machine learning methods that analyze MR images of the whole brain have reported respectable accuracies for the task of distinguishing brains of males from brains of females. However, most existing studies lacked a careful control for brain volume differences between sexes and, if done, their accuracy often declined to 70% or below. This raises questions about the relevance of accuracies achieved without careful control of overall volume.

We examined how accurately sex can be classified from gray matter properties of the human brain when matching on overall brain volume. We tested, how robust machine learning classifiers are when predicting cross-cohort, i.e. when they are used on a different cohort than they were trained on. Furthermore, we studied how their accuracy depends on the size of the training set and attempted to identify brain regions relevant for successful classification. MRI data was used from two population-based data sets of 3298 mostly older adults from the Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP) and 399 mostly younger adults from the Human Connectome Project (HCP), respectively. We benchmarked two multivariate methods, logistic regression and a 3D convolutional neural network.

We show that male and female brains of the same intracranial volume can be distinguished with >92% accuracy with logistic regression on a dataset of 1166 matched individuals. The same model also reached 85% accuracy on a different cohort without retraining. The accuracy for both methods increased with the training cohort size up to and beyond 3000 individuals, suggesting that classifiers trained on smaller cohorts likely have an accuracy disadvantage. We found no single outstanding brain region necessary for successful classification, but important features appear rather distributed across the brain.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Neuroimage. Reports
Neuroimage. Reports Neuroscience (General)
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
87 days
期刊最新文献
Neonatal inflammation and near-term white matter microstructure in infants born very preterm Measuring cognitive load in multitasking using mobile fNIRS MRI-guided clustering of patients with mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease using self-organizing maps Evaluating state-based network dynamics in anhedonia Unresponsiveness induced by sevoflurane and propofol is associated with reduced basal forebrain cholinergic nuclei functional connectivity in humans, a pilot exploratory study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1