Differences in Brain Network Topology Based on Alcohol Use History in Adolescents
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Approximately 6 million youth aged 12 to 20 consume alcohol monthly in the United States. The effect of alcohol consumption in adolescence on behavior and cognition is heavily researched; however, little is known about how alcohol consumption in adolescence may alter brain function, leading to long-term developmental detriments. In order to investigate differences in brain connectivity associated with alcohol use in adolescents, brain networks were constructed using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging data collected by the National Consortium on Alcohol and NeuroDevelopment in Adolescence (NCANDA) from 698 youth (12–21 years; 117 hazardous drinkers and 581 no/low drinkers). Analyses assessed differences in brain network topology based on alcohol consumption in eight predefined brain networks, as well as in whole-brain connectivity. Within the central executive network (CEN), basal ganglia network (BGN), and sensorimotor network (SMN), no/low drinkers demonstrated stronger and more frequent connections between highly globally efficient nodes, with fewer and weaker connections between highly clustered nodes. Inverse results were observed within the dorsal attention network (DAN), visual network (VN), and frontotemporal network (FTN), with no/low drinkers demonstrating weaker connections between nodes with high efficiency and increased frequency of clustered nodes compared to hazardous drinkers. Cross-sectional results from this study show clear organizational differences between adolescents with no/low or hazardous alcohol use, suggesting that aberrant connectivity in these brain networks is associated with risky drinking behaviors.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 95 · Cited by 5
- Authors
- Kirse, H. A., Bahrami, M., Lyday, R. G., Simpson, S. L., Peterson-Sockwell, H., Burdette, J. H., & Laurienti, P. J.
- Affiliations
- Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
- Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (US)
- Laboratory for Complex Brain Networks, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC 27101, USA
- Corresponding author
- Kirse, Haley A.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Brain Sciences
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2023-12-05
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 12
- Pages
- 1676
- ISSN
- 2076-3425 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10741456
- OpenAlex
- W4389335950
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 95
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 4
- FWCI
- 0.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Brain Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Preprints.org (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (AA029926, AA026117, AA007565)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- adolescent alcohol use, hazardous drinking, brain network topology, resting-state functional connectivity, NCANDA, frontoparietal network, basal ganglia network, sensorimotor network, dorsal attention network, visual network, fronto-temporal network, global efficiency, clustering coefficient, adolescent brain development
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