Home › Research › Brain scans and imaging
Effects of aging on default mode network activity in resting state fMRI: does the method of analysis matter?
Koch W, Teipel S, Mueller S, Buerger K, Bokde AL, Hampel H, Coates U, Reiser M et al.. NeuroImage, 2010-03-12
Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies
Unlabelled Functional MRI (fMRI) of default mode network (DMN) brain activity during resting state is gaining attention as a potential non-invasive biomarker to diagnose incipient Alzheimer's disease. The aim of this study was to identify effects of normal aging on the DMN using different methods of fMRI processing and evaluation. Methods fMRI was acquired in 17 young and 21 old healthy subjects and the data were analyzed with (a) volumes of interest (VOI)-based signal time course and (b) independent component analyses (ICA). In the first approach, the strength of DMN region inter-connectivity (as expressed with correlation coefficients) was of primary interest, the second method provided a measure of the magnitude of DMN co-activation. Results The older subjects exhibited significantly lower DMN activity in the posterior cingulate (PCC, t-test P<.001) as well as a tendency to lower activity in all other DMN regions in comparison to the younger subjects. We found no significant effect of age on DMN inter-connectivity. Conclusion Effects of normal aging such as loss of PCC co-activity could be detected by ICA, but not by signal time course correlation analyses of DMN inter-connectivity. This either indicates lower sensitivity of inter-connectivity measures to detect subtle DMN changes or indicate that ICA and time course analyses determine different properties of DMN co-activation. Our results, therefore, provide fundamental knowledge for a potential future use of functional MRI as biomarker for neurodegenerative dementias where diminished DMN activity needs to be reliably differentiated from that observed in health aging.
Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris
APA 7th
Koch, W., Teipel, S., Mueller, S., Buerger, K., Bokde, A. L., Hampel, H., et al. (2010). Effects of aging on default mode network activity in resting state fMRI: does the method of analysis matter? NeuroImage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.008
Vancouver
Koch W, Teipel S, Mueller S, Buerger K, Bokde AL, Hampel H, et al. Effects of aging on default mode network activity in resting state fMRI: does the method of analysis matter? NeuroImage. 2010. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.008. PMID: 20004726.
BibTeX
@article{koch2010-20004726,
author = {Koch, W. and Teipel, S. and Mueller, S. and Buerger, K. and Bokde, A. L. and Hampel, H. and Coates, U. and Reiser, M. and others},
title = {{Effects of aging on default mode network activity in resting state fMRI: does the method of analysis matter?}},
journal = {NeuroImage},
year = {2010},
doi = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.008},
pmid = {20004726},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.008}
}
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.
Key findings
- Results The older subjects exhibited significantly lower DMN activity in the posterior cingulate (PCC, t-test P<.001) as well as a tendency to lower activity in all other DMN regions in comparison to the younger subjects.
- We found no significant effect of age on DMN inter-connectivity.
- This either indicates lower sensitivity of inter-connectivity measures to detect subtle DMN changes or indicate that ICA and time course analyses determine different properties of DMN co-activation.
- Our results, therefore, provide fundamental knowledge for a potential future use of functional MRI as biomarker for neurodegenerative dementias where diminished DMN activity needs to be reliably differentiated from that observed in health aging.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Brain scans & tests →
Study details
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 36/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. 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 journal's citation record, 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 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 36 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (NeuroImage) |
| Journal's citation record | — / 4 | No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score |
| 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 | 10 / 10 | Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal. |
| How recent | 1 / 5 | 2010 — within 20 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 | 2 / 2 | Indexed in PubMed (PMID 20004726) |
| Free to read | 0 / 2 | Behind a paywall — scores zero |
| Points | 21 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 21 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 36 out of 100. |
| Total | 36 / 100 | — |
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.