Cited by 174Advanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Breath holding reveals differences in fMRI BOLD signal in children and adults

Thomason, Moriah E., Burrows, Brittany E., Gabrieli, John D.E., Glover, Gary H.·2005·NeuroImage

Abstract

Application of fMRI to studies of cognitive development is of growing interest because of its sensitivity and non-invasive nature. However, interpretation of fMRI results in children is presently based on vascular dynamics that have been studied primarily in healthy adults. Comparison of the neurological basis of cognitive development is valid to the extent that the neurovascular responsiveness between children and adults is equal. The present study was designed to detect age-related vascular differences that may contribute to altered BOLD fMRI signal responsiveness. We examined BOLD signal changes in response to breath holding, a global, systemic state change in brain oxygenation. Children exhibited greater percent signal changes than adults in grey and white matter, and this was accompanied by an increase in noise. Consequently, the volume of activation exceeding statistical threshold was reduced in children. The reduced activation in children was well modeled by adding noise to adult data. These findings raise the possibility that developmental differences in fMRI findings between children and adults could, under some circumstances, reflect greater noise in the BOLD response in the brains of children than adults. BOLD responses varied across brain regions, but showed similar regional variation in children and adults.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.12.026

Cites

71 of 71 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Thomason, M. E., Burrows, B. E., Gabrieli, J. D. E., & Glover, G. H.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
Corresponding author
Thomason, Moriah E.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-04
Volume
25
Issue
3
Pages
824-837
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2129291315
Cited by
174
References
71
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
FWCI
6.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH61426, R01MH061426)
  • National Center for Research Resources (RR 09784, P41RR009784)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
breath-holding, BOLD signal, children versus adults, neurovascular coupling, cognitive development, cerebral oxygenation, brain activation, gray and white matter
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aging, Inhalation, Brain, Child, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Image Enhancement, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Reference Values, Regional Blood Flow, Respiration, Artifacts, Imaging, Three-Dimensional

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review