Cited by 126Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesComplex Network Analysis Techniques

The effect of network thresholding and weighting on structural brain networks in the uk biobank

Open access
Buchanan, Colin R., Bastin, Mark E., Ritchie, Stuart J., Liewald, David C., Madole, James W., Tucker-Drob, Elliot M., Deary, Ian J., Cox, Simon R.·2020·NeuroImage

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Whole-brain structural networks can be constructed using diffusion MRI and probabilistic tractography. However, measurement noise and the probabilistic nature of the tracking procedure result in an unknown proportion of spurious white matter connections. Faithful disentanglement of spurious and genuine connections is hindered by a lack of comprehensive anatomical information at the network-level. Therefore, network thresholding methods are widely used to remove ostensibly false connections, but it is not yet clear how different thresholding strategies affect basic network properties and their associations with meaningful demographic variables, such as age. In a sample of 3153 generally healthy volunteers from the UK Biobank Imaging Study (aged 44-77 years), we constructed whole-brain structural networks and applied two principled network thresholding approaches (consistency and proportional thresholding). These were applied over a broad range of threshold levels across six alternative network weightings (streamline count, fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity and three novel weightings from neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging) and for four common network measures (mean edge weight, characteristic path length, network efficiency and network clustering coefficient). We compared network measures against age associations and found that: 1) measures derived from unthresholded matrices yielded the weakest age-associations (0.033 ​≤ ​|β| ​≤ ​0.409); and 2) the most commonly-used level of proportional-thresholding from the literature (retaining 68.7% of all possible connections) yielded significantly weaker age-associations (0.070 ​≤ ​|β| ​≤ ​0.406) than the consistency-based approach which retained only 30% of connections (0.140 ​≤ ​|β| ​≤ ​0.409). However, we determined that the stringency of the threshold was a stronger determinant of the network-age association than the choice of threshold method and the two thresholding approaches identified a highly overlapping set of connections (ICC ​= ​0.84), when matched at 70% network sparsity. Generally, more stringent thresholding resulted in more age-sensitive network measures in five of the six network weightings, except at the highest levels of sparsity (>90%), where crucial connections were then removed. At two commonly-used threshold levels, the age-associations of the connections that were discarded (mean β ​≤ ​|0.068|) were significantly smaller in magnitude than the corresponding age-associations of the connections that were retained (mean β ​≤ ​|0.219|, p ​< ​0.001, uncorrected). Given histological evidence of widespread degeneration of structural brain connectivity with increasing age, these results indicate that stringent thresholding methods may be most accurate in identifying true white matter connections.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116443

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • There is ongoing disagreement about whether filtering methods are beneficial or detrimental to the structural connectome.

    “Research is still underway to determine the best method(s) for filtering, with some disagreement on the beneficial versus detrimental effect of these methods on the structural connectome (Buchanan et al., 2020; Civier et al., 2019; Drakesmith et al., 2015; Frigo et al., 2020; Schiavi et al., 2020a; Yeh et al., 2016a).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. Agosta F, Galantucci S, Riva N, Chiò A, Messina S, Iannaccone S, Calvo A, Silani V, Copetti M, Falini A, Comi G, Filippi M, 2014 Intrahemispheric and interhemispheric structural network abnormalities in PLS and ALS. Hum. Brain Mapp 10.1002/hbm.22286 PMC6869498 23633431 · DOI
  2. Alfaro-Almagro F, Jenkinson M, Bangerter NK, Andersson JLR, Griffanti L, Douaud G, Sotiropoulos SN, Jbabdi S, Hernandez-Fernandez M, Vallee E, Vidaurre D, Webster M, McCarthy P, Rorden C, Daducci A, Alexander DC, Zhang H, Dragonu I, Matthews PM, Miller KL, Smith SM, 2018 Image processing and Quality Control for the first 10,000 brain imaging datasets from UK Biobank. Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.10.034 PMC5770339 29079522 · DOI
  3. Alloza C, Cox SR, Blesa Cábez M, Redmond P, Whalley HC, Ritchie SJ, Muñoz Maniega S, Valdés Hernández M. del C., Tucker-Drob EM, Lawrie SM, Wardlaw JM, Deary IJ, Bastin ME, 2018 Polygenic risk score for schizophrenia and structural brain connectivity in older age: A longitudinal connectome and tractography study. Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.08.075 PMC6215331 30179718 · DOI
  4. Barbagallo G, Caligiuri ME, Arabia G, Cherubini A, Lupo A, Nisticò R, Salsone M, Novellino F, Morelli M, Cascini GL, Galea D, Quattrone A, 2017 Structural connectivity differences in motor network between tremor-dominant and nontremor Parkinson’s disease. Hum. Brain Mapp 10.1002/hbm.23697 PMC6866900 28631404 · DOI
  5. Bastin ME, Munoz Maniega S, Ferguson KJ, Brown LJ, Wardlaw JM, MacLullich AM, Clayden JD, 2010 Quantifying the effects of normal ageing on white matter structure using unsupervised tract shape modelling. Neuroimage 51, 1– 10. 20171285 PMC3763188
  6. Beare R, Adamson C, Bellgrove MA, Vilgis V, Vance A, Seal ML, Silk TJ, 2017 Altered structural connectivity in ADHD: a network based analysis. Brain Imaging Behav. 10.1007/s11682-016-9559-9 27289356 · DOI
  7. Behrens TEJ, Berg HJ, Jbabdi S, Rushworth MFS, Woolrich MW, 2007 Probabilistic diffusion tractography with multiple fibre orientations: What can we gain? Neuroimage 34, 144– 155. 17070705 PMC7116582
  8. Behrens TEJ, Woolrich MW, Jenkinson M, Johansen-Berg H, Nunes RG, Clare S, Matthews PM, Brady JM, Smith SM, 2003 Characterization and propagation of uncertainty in diffusion-weighted MR imaging. Magn. Reson. Med 50, 1077– 1088. 14587019
  9. Betzel RF, Griffa A, Hagmann P, Mišić B, 2018 Distance-dependent consensus thresholds for generating group-representative structural brain networks. Netw. Neurosci 10.1162/netn_a_00075 PMC6444521 30984903 · DOI
  10. Buchanan CR, Pernet CR, Gorgolewski KJ, Storkey AJ, Bastin ME, 2014 Test-retest reliability of structural brain networks from diffusion MRI. Neuroimage 86, 231– 243. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.054 24096127 · DOI
  11. Bullitt E, Gerig G, Pizer SM, Lin W, Aylward SR, 2003 Measuring tortuosity of the intracerebral vasculature from MRA images. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 22, 1163– 1171. 10.1109/TMI.2003.816964 12956271 PMC2430603 · DOI
  12. Burzynska AZ, Preuschhof C, Bäckman L, Nyberg L, Li SC, Lindenberger U, Heekeren HR, 2010 Age-related differences in white matter microstructure: Region-specific patterns of diffusivity. Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.09.041 19782758 · DOI
  13. Civier O, Smith RE, Yeh C-H, Connelly A, Calamante F, 2019 Is removal of weak connections necessary for graph-theoretical analysis of dense weighted structural connectomes from diffusion MRI? Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.02.039 30844506 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Collin G, Sporns O, Mandl RCW, Van Den Heuvel MP, 2014 Structural and functional aspects relating to cost and benefit of rich club organization in the human cerebral cortex. Cereb. Cortex 10.1093/cercor/bht064 PMC4128699 23551922 · DOI
  15. Conti E, Mitra J, Calderoni S, Pannek K, Shen KK, Pagnozzi A, Rose S, Mazzotti S, Scelfo D, Tosetti M, Muratori F, Cioni G, Guzzetta A, 2017 Network over-connectivity differentiates autism spectrum disorder from other developmental disorders in toddlers: A diffusion MRI study. Hum. Brain Mapp 10.1002/hbm.23520 PMC6866938 28094463 · DOI
  16. Cox SR, Ritchie SJ, Tucker-Drob EM, Liewald DC, Hagenaars SP, Davies G, Wardlaw JM, Gale CR, Bastin ME, Deary IJ, 2016 Ageing and brain white matter structure in 3,513 UK Biobank participants. Nat. Commun 10.1038/ncomms13629 PMC5172385 27976682 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Damoiseaux JS, Smith SM, Witter MP, Sanz-Arigita EJ, Barkhof F, Scheltens P, Stam CJ, Zarei M, Rombouts SARB, 2009 White matter tract integrity in aging and alzheimer’s disease. Hum. Brain Mapp 10.1002/hbm.20563 PMC6870688 18412132 · DOI
  18. de Reus MA, van den Heuvel MP, 2013 Estimating false positives and negatives in brain networks. Neuroimage 70, 402– 409. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.12.066 23296185 · DOI
  19. Dimitriadis SI, Drakesmith M, Bells S, Parker GD, Linden DE, Jones DK, 2017 Improving the reliability of network metrics in structural brain networks by integrating different network weighting strategies into a single graph. Front. Neurosci 10.3389/fnins.2017.00694 PMC5742099 29311775 · DOI
  20. Fischl B, Salat DH, Van Der Kouwe AJW, Makris N, Ségonne F, Quinn BT, Dale AM, 2004 Sequence-independent segmentation of magnetic resonance images. Neuroimage 23 Suppl 1, S69– 84. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2004.07.016 15501102 · DOI
  21. Fjell AM, Sneve MH, Storsve AB, Grydeland H, Yendiki A, Walhovd KB, 2016 Brain Events Underlying Episodic Memory Changes in Aging: A Longitudinal Investigation of Structural and Functional Connectivity. Cereb. Cortex 10.1093/cercor/bhv102 PMC4737610 25994960 · DOI
  22. Fry A, Littlejohns TJ, Sudlow C, Doherty N, Adamska L, Sprosen T, Collins R, Allen NE, 2017 Comparison of Sociodemographic and Health-Related Characteristics of UK Biobank Participants with Those of the General Population. Am. J. Epidemiol 10.1093/aje/kwx246 PMC5860371 28641372 · DOI · Paper page
  23. Funnell MG, Corballis PM, Gazzaniga MS, 2000 Cortical and subcortical interhemispheric interactions following partial and complete callosotomy. Arch. Neurol 57, 185– 189. 10681075
  24. Gong G, Rosa-Neto P, Carbonell F, Chen ZJ, He Y, Evans AC, 2009 Age- and gender-related differences in the cortical anatomical network. J. Neurosci 29, 15684– 15693. 20016083 PMC2831804
  25. Goulas A, Uylings HBM, Hilgetag CC, 2017 Principles of ipsilateral and contralateral cortico-cortical connectivity in the mouse. Brain Struct. Funct 10.1007/s00429-016-1277-y 27497948 · DOI
  26. Hagmann P, Kurant M, Gigandet X, Thiran P, Wedeen VJ, Meuli R, Thiran J-P, 2007 Mapping Human Whole-Brain Structural Networks with Diffusion MRI. PLoS One 2, 9. PMC1895920 17611629
  27. Irimia A, Chambers MC, Torgerson CM, Van Horn JD, 2012 Circular representation of human cortical networks for subject and population-level connectomic visualization. Neuroimage 60, 1340– 1351. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.01.107 22305988 PMC3594415 · DOI
  28. Jbabdi S, Johansen-Berg H, 2011 Tractography: where do we go from here? Brain Connect. 1, 169– 183. 22433046 PMC3677805
  29. Jenkinson M, Smith S, 2001 A global optimisation method for robust affine registration of brain images. Med. Image Anal 5, 143– 156. 11516708
  30. Jung JY, Cloutman LL, Binney RJ, Lambon Ralph MA, 2017 The structural connectivity of higher order association cortices reflects human functional brain networks. Cortex. 10.1016/j.cortex.2016.08.011 PMC5726605 27692846 · DOI
  31. Lo C-Y, Wang P-N, Chou K-H, Wang J, He Y, Lin C-P, 2010 Diffusion tensor tractography reveals abnormal topological organization in structural cortical networks in Alzheimer’s disease. J. Neurosci 30, 16876– 16885. 21159959 PMC6634928
  32. Maier-Hein KH, Neher PF, Houde JC, Côté MA, Garyfallidis E, Zhong J, Chamberland M, Yeh FC, Lin YC, Ji Q, Reddick WE, Glass JO, Chen DQ, Feng Y, Gao C, Wu Y, Ma J, Renjie H, Li Q, Westin CF, Deslauriers-Gauthier S, González JOO, Paquette M, St-Jean S, Girard G, Rheault F, Sidhu J, Tax CMW, Guo F, Mesri HY, Dávid S, Froeling M, Heemskerk AM, Leemans A, Boré A, Pinsard B, Bedetti C, Desrosiers M, Brambati S, Doyon J, Sarica A, Vasta R, Cerasa A, Quattrone A, Yeatman J, Khan AR, Hodges W, Alexander S, Romascano D, Barakovic M, Auría A, Esteban O, Lemkaddem A, Thiran JP, Cetingul HE, Odry BL, Mailhe B, Nadar MS, Pizzagalli F, Prasad G, Villalon-Reina JE, Galvis J, Thompson PM, Requejo FDS, Laguna PL, Lacerda LM, Barrett R, Dell’Acqua F, Catani M, Petit L, Caruyer E, Daducci A, Dyrby TB, Holland-Letz T, Hilgetag CC, Stieltjes B, Descoteaux M, 2017 The challenge of mapping the human connectome based on diffusion tractography. Nat. Commun 10.1038/s41467-017-01285-x PMC5677006 29116093 · DOI
  33. McColgan P, Blom T, Rees G, Seunarine K, Gregory S, Johnson E, Durr A, Roos R, Scahill R, Clark C, Tabrizi S, Razi A, 2018 Stability and sensitivity of structural connectomes: effect of thresholding and filtering and demonstration in neurodegeneration. bioRxiv 416826. 10.1101/416826 · DOI
  34. Miller KL, Alfaro-Almagro F, Bangerter NK, Thomas DL, Yacoub E, Xu J, Bartsch AJ, Jbabdi S, Sotiropoulos SN, Andersson JLR, Griffanti L, Douaud G, Okell TW, Weale P, Dragonu I, Garratt S, Hudson S, Collins R, Jenkinson M, Matthews PM, Smith SM, 2016b Multimodal population brain imaging in the UK Biobank prospective epidemiological study. Nat. Neurosci 10.1038/nn.4393 PMC5086094 27643430 · DOI · Paper page
  35. Mori S, Oishi K, Faria AV, 2009 White matter atlases based on diffusion tensor imaging. Curr. Opin. Neurol 10.1097/WCO.0b013e32832d954b PMC2883814 19571751 · DOI
  36. Nomi JS, Schettini E, Broce I, Dick AS, Uddin LQ, 2018 Structural connections of functionally defined human insular subdivisions. Cereb. Cortex 10.1093/cercor/bhx211 PMC6132280 28968768 · DOI
  37. Oh SW, Harris JA, Ng L, Winslow B, Cain N, Mihalas S, Wang Q, Lau C, Kuan L, Henry AM, Mortrud MT, Ouellette B, Nguyen TN, Sorensen SA, Slaughterbeck CR, Wakeman W, Li Y, Feng D, Ho A, Nicholas E, Hirokawa KE, Bohn P, Joines KM, Peng H, Hawrylycz MJ, Phillips JW, Hohmann JG, Wohnoutka P, Gerfen CR, Koch C, Bernard A, Dang C, Jones AR, Zeng H, 2014 A mesoscale connectome of the mouse brain. Nature 10.1038/nature13186 PMC5102064 24695228 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Qi S, Meesters S, Nicolay K, ter Haar Romeny BM, Ossenblok P, 2015 The influence of construction methodology on structural brain network measures: A review. J. Neurosci. Methods 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2015.06.016 26129743 · DOI
  39. Roberts JA, Perry A, Roberts G, Mitchell PB, Breakspear M, 2017 Consistency-based thresholding of the human connectome. Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.09.053 27666386 · DOI · Paper page
  40. Robinson EC, Hammers A, Ericsson A, Edwards AD, Rueckert D, 2010 Identifying population differences in whole-brain structural networks: a machine learning approach. Neuroimage 50, 910– 919. 20079440
  41. Rubinov M, Sporns O, 2010 Complex network measures of brain connectivity: uses and interpretations. Neuroimage 52, 1059– 1069. 19819337
  42. Salat DH, 2011 The Declining Infrastructure of the Aging Brain. Brain Connect. 10.1089/brain.2011.0056 PMC3621330 22432418 · DOI
  43. Smith RE, Tournier JD, Calamante F, Connelly A, 2015 SIFT2: Enabling dense quantitative assessment of brain white matter connectivity using streamlines tractography. Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.06.092 26163802 · DOI
  44. Smith SM, 2002 Fast robust automated brain extraction. Hum. Brain Mapp. 17, 143– 155. 10.1002/hbm.10062 12391568 PMC6871816 · DOI · Paper page
  45. Sotiropoulos SN, Zalesky A, 2017 Building connectomes using diffusion MRI: Why, how and but. NMR Biomed. 10.1002/nbm.3752 PMC6491971 28654718 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Sporns O, Tononi G, Kötter R, 2005 The Human Connectome: A Structural Description of the Human Brain. PLoS Comput. Biol 1, e42. 16201007 PMC1239902
  47. Thomas C, Ye FQ, Irfanoglu MO, Modi P, Saleem KS, Leopold DA, Pierpaoli C, 2014 Anatomical accuracy of brain connections derived from diffusion MRI tractography is inherently limited. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci 10.1073/pnas.1405672111 PMC4246325 25368179 · DOI · Paper page
  48. Tournier JD, Calamante F, Connelly A, 2012 MRtrix: Diffusion tractography in crossing fiber regions. Int. J. Imaging Syst. Technol 10.1002/ima.22005 · DOI · Paper page
  49. Van Den Heuvel MP, Sporns O, 2011 Rich-Club Organization of the Human Connectome. J. Neurosci 31, 15775– 15786. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3539-11.2011 22049421 PMC6623027 · DOI · Paper page
  50. Van Wijk BCM, Stam CJ, Daffertshofer A, 2010 Comparing Brain Networks of Different Size and Connectivity Density Using Graph Theory. PLoS One 5, e13701 10.1371/journal.pone.0013701 21060892 PMC2965659 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Verstraete E, Veldink JH, Mandl RCW, Van Den Berg LH, Van Den Heuvel MP, 2011 Impaired Structural Motor Connectome in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis. PLoS One 6, 10. PMC3166305 21912680
  52. Williams EJ, 1959 The Comparison of Regression Variables. J. R. Stat. Soc. Ser. B 10.1111/j.2517-6161.1959.tb00346.x · DOI
  53. Yeh FC, Panesar S, Fernandes D, Meola A, Yoshino M, Fernandez-Miranda JC, Vettel JM, Verstynen T, 2018 Population-averaged atlas of the macroscale human structural connectome and its network topology. Neuroimage. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.05.027 PMC6921501 29758339 · DOI
  54. Zhao T, Cao M, Niu H, Zuo XN, Evans A, He Y, Dong Q, Shu N, 2015 Age-related changes in the topological organization of the white matter structural connectome across the human lifespan. Hum. Brain Mapp 10.1002/hbm.22877 PMC6869038 26173024 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Buchanan, C. R., Bastin, M. E., Ritchie, S. J., Liewald, D. C., Madole, J. W., Tucker-Drob, E. M., Deary, I. J., & Cox, S. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Buchanan, Colin R.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-05
Volume
211
Pages
116443
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2999262508
Cited by
126
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 3
FWCI
9.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council
  • Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology
  • Dementias Platform UK (MR/L015382/1)
  • Medical Research Council
  • National Institutes of Health (MR/M013111/1, MR/R024065/1, R01AG054628)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Complex Network Analysis Techniques
Keywords
structural brain networks, network thresholding, age effects, white matter connections, NODDI, fractional anisotropy, mean diffusivity, network efficiency, clustering coefficient, average path length, diffusion MRI, probabilistic tractography, network sparsity
MeSH terms
Adult, Age Factors, Aged, Female, United Kingdom, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nerve Net, Biological Specimen Banks, Diffusion Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neuroimaging, White Matter

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