Cited by 0Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies

Predicting trail-making test performance using 7-Tesla structural cerebral MRI

Open access
Schnellbächer, Gereon J., Rajkumar, Ravichandran, Veselinović, Tanja, Ramkiran, Shukti, Hagen, Jana, Collee, Maria, Shah, N. Jon, Neuner, Irene +1 more·2026·Translational Psychiatry

Abstract

Psychopharmaceutical therapy has seen a lack of improvement in efficacy, highlighting the need for a more individualized treatment approach that optimally leverages pharmaceutical effects. To achieve this, it is necessary to identify factors that can predict psychological attributes and treatment outcomes. We hypothesize that brain morphology may serve as a predictor of performance in psychological tests. A 7-Tesla-MRI system was used to measure 74 transdiagnostic patients and 41 healthy controls. Values for grey matter volume (GMV), cortical thickness and gyrification based on the Schaefer 100 Atlas for parcellation were determined. Using this morphological data, performance in a Trail-Making Test (TMT) - A and B was predicted with the help of a deep learning model. A SHAP analysis was conducted to identify the key variables important for the model. The accuracy in predicting TMT performance was very good at 0.795. The most decisive feature influencing predictions was gyrification. Areas indicating inter-group differences were focused in the frontal cortex, as well as in temporal and parietal regions. Morphological characteristics can predict test performance with high accuracy. These results support the implementation of a transdiagnostic approach in clinical practice to better address the underlying pathophysiology. Symptom prediction based on neuroimaging data appears to be an achievable goal.

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 · 10.1038/s41398-026-04402-x

Cites

3 of 3 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

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

Authors
Schnellbächer, G. J., Rajkumar, R., Veselinović, T., Ramkiran, S., Hagen, J., Collee, M., Shah, N. J., Neuner, I., & Dammers, J.
Affiliations
  • RWTH Aachen University (DE)
  • Forschungszentrum Jülich (DE)
Corresponding author
Neuner, Irene
Venue
Translational Psychiatry
Published
2026-10-19
Volume
16
Issue
1
ISSN
2158-3188 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W7222955257
Cited by
0
References
3
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Translational Psychiatry (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
Keywords
Trail Making Test, cognitive performance prediction, brain structure, gray matter volume, cortical thickness, cortical folding, 7T MRI, transdiagnostic psychiatry, deep learning, SHAP analysis, frontal cortex, personalized treatment
MeSH terms
Deep Learning, Adult, Cerebral Cortex, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Trail Making Test, Case-Control Studies, Gray 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