Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Comparing Harmonization Approaches for Protocol-Related Variability in Multisite Diffusion MRI Data
Liou K, Thomopoulos SI, Villalon Reina JE, Yoo H, Shuai Y, Chehrzadeh S, Arani A, Borowski B et al.. bioRxiv, 2026-07-11
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Diffusion MRI (dMRI) enables assessment of white matter microstructural abnormalities in Alzheimer's disease (AD), and multisite datasets enable more robust modeling of non-biological variation that can confound analyses. The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) includes over 10 dMRI protocols, necessitating robust methods to model protocol-related variability when pooling data. Here, we compared three harmonization approaches: (1) mixed-effects models, (2) ComBat-GAM, and (3) eHarmonize, a reference-based lifespan method. We assessed their ability to reduce protocol-related variability in diffusion tensor imaging fractional anisotropy (FA) and mean diffusivity (MD) while preserving associations with cognitive impairment (CI), and amyloid-beta (Aβ) and tau PET burden in 1,086 ADNI3/4 participants. All approaches yielded more closely aligned FA/MD distributions across protocols. Associations with clinical indicators of CI were highly consistent across approaches, whereas PET associations were less widespread and more variable. Overall, multiple strategies effectively modeled protocol-related variability while preserving AD-related associations.
Key findings
- Overall, multiple strategies effectively modeled protocol-related variability while preserving AD-related associations.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 16/100
Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. It scored 21 on the same rubric, but non-peer-reviewed sources are capped at 16, so it shows as 16. Scored zero for study design, sample size, effect reported, studied in people and randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 13 of the 62 points we could judge it on, which is 21 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 2 / 10 | Tier 4 — not a peer-reviewed journal (bioRxiv) |
| Journal's citation record | 0 / 4 | Not a journal article, so the journal's record does not count |
| Study design | 0 / 12 | No study design recorded — scores zero, not guessed (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Strength of evidence | 1 / 5 | Rated “low” in our summary |
| Peer-review validation | 4 / 10 | Preprint — not yet peer-reviewed. Hosted on a preprint server. |
| How recent | 5 / 5 | 2026 — within 1 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 0 / 4 | Participant count not stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 0 / 3 | Not stated whether this was studied in people — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Randomised / blinded | 0 / 2 | No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Times cited | — / 7 | No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score |
| Citations per year | — / 5 | No citation count or no year — left out of this score |
| Impact for its field and year | — / 6 | No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score |
| Cited by studies here | — / 6 | Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score |
| Still being cited | — / 4 | No yearly citation counts — left out of this score |
| Senior author's track record | — / 4 | Senior author's record not available — left out of this score |
| Institution's track record | — / 3 | No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| Multi-centre collaboration | — / 3 | Institutions not listed — left out of this score |
| Indexed in PubMed | 1 / 2 | Not in PubMed, but has a DOI |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 13 / 62 | Scored on 12 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 13 of the 62 points we could judge it on is 21 out of 100. |
| Total | 21 / 100 | Capped to 16 because this is not a peer-reviewed article. |
What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →
Read the original
Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
Liou, K., Thomopoulos, S. I., Villalon Reina, J. E., Yoo, H., Shuai, Y., Chehrzadeh, S., et al. (2026). Comparing Harmonization Approaches for Protocol-Related Variability in Multisite Diffusion MRI Data. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.07.07.737018
Vancouver
Liou K, Thomopoulos SI, Villalon Reina JE, Yoo H, Shuai Y, Chehrzadeh S, et al. Comparing Harmonization Approaches for Protocol-Related Variability in Multisite Diffusion MRI Data. bioRxiv. 2026. doi:10.64898/2026.07.07.737018.
BibTeX
@article{liou2026-e30b4418,
author = {Liou, K. and Thomopoulos, S. I. and Villalon Reina, J. E. and Yoo, H. and Shuai, Y. and Chehrzadeh, S. and Arani, A. and Borowski, B. and others},
title = {{Comparing Harmonization Approaches for Protocol-Related Variability in Multisite Diffusion MRI Data}},
journal = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
doi = {10.64898/2026.07.07.737018},
url = {https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.07.07.737018}
}