Home › Research › Digital health tools
Functional neural network analysis in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease using EEG and graph theory
de Haan W, Pijnenburg YA, Strijers RL, van der Made Y, van der Flier WM, Scheltens P, Stam CJ.. BMC neuroscience, 2009-08-21
Topic: Brain imaging, connectivity and assessment
Background Although a large body of knowledge about both brain structure and function has been gathered over the last decades, we still have a poor understanding of their exact relationship. Graph theory provides a method to study the relation between network structure and function, and its application to neuroscientific data is an emerging research field. We investigated topological changes in large-scale functional brain networks in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) by means of graph theoretical analysis of resting-state EEG recordings. EEGs of 20 patients with mild to moderate AD, 15 FTLD patients, and 23 non-demented individuals were recorded in an eyes-closed resting-state. The synchronization likelihood (SL), a measure of functional connectivity, was calculated for each sensor pair in 0.5-4 Hz, 4-8 Hz, 8-10 Hz, 10-13 Hz, 13-30 Hz and 30-45 Hz frequency bands. The resulting connectivity matrices were converted to unweighted graphs, whose structure was characterized with several measures: mean clustering coefficient (local connectivity), characteristic path length (global connectivity) and degree correlation (network 'assortativity'). All results were normalized for network size and compared with random control networks. Results In AD, the clustering coefficient decreased in the lower alpha and beta bands (p < 0.001), and the characteristic path length decreased in the lower alpha and gamma bands (p < 0.05) compared to controls. In FTLD no significant differences with controls were found in these measures. The degree correlation decreased in both alpha bands in AD compared to controls (p < 0.05), but increased in the FTLD lower alpha band compared with controls (p < 0.01). Conclusion With decreasing local and global connectivity parameters, the large-scale functional brain network organization in AD deviates from the optimal 'small-world' network structure towards a more 'random' type. This is associated with less efficient information exchange between brain areas, supporting the disconnection hypothesis of AD. Surprisingly, FTLD patients show changes in the opposite direction, towards a (perhaps excessively) more 'ordered' network structure, possibly reflecting a different underlying pathophysiological process.
Key findings
- All results were normalized for network size and compared with random control networks.
- Results In AD, the clustering coefficient decreased in the lower alpha and beta bands (p < 0.001), and the characteristic path length decreased in the lower alpha and gamma bands (p < 0.05) compared to controls.
- In FTLD no significant differences with controls were found in these measures.
- The degree correlation decreased in both alpha bands in AD compared to controls (p < 0.05), but increased in the FTLD lower alpha band compared with controls (p < 0.01).
- This is associated with less efficient information exchange between brain areas, supporting the disconnection hypothesis of AD.
New to this subject? Start with our plain-English guide: Digital health →
Study details
- Participants20
- Evidence strengthLow
How this study scored 47/100
Published in a peer-reviewed journal. Scored zero for study design, effect reported 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 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 47 out of 100.
| Component | Points | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Journal tier | 7 / 10 | Tier 3 — peer-reviewed journal (BMC neuroscience) |
| 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 | 2009 — within 20 year(s) of the newest study here |
| Sample size | 1 / 4 | 20 participants |
| Effect reported | 0 / 3 | No effect size reported — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0) |
| Studied in people | 3 / 3 | Studied in people (participant count stated) |
| 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 19698093) |
| Free to read | 2 / 2 | Free to read |
| Points | 27 / 58 | Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 27 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 47 out of 100. |
| Total | 47 / 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.
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 names 7 authors; APA and Vancouver show the first six, BibTeX and the downloads carry all of them. Check the citation against the original before you use it.
APA 7th
de Haan, W., Pijnenburg, Y. A., Strijers, R. L., van der Made, Y., van der Flier, W. M., Scheltens, P., et al. (2009). Functional neural network analysis in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease using EEG and graph theory. BMC neuroscience. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-10-101
Vancouver
de Haan W, Pijnenburg YA, Strijers RL, van der Made Y, van der Flier WM, Scheltens P, et al. Functional neural network analysis in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease using EEG and graph theory. BMC neuroscience. 2009. doi:10.1186/1471-2202-10-101. PMID: 19698093.
BibTeX
@article{dehaan2009-19698093,
author = {de Haan, W. and Pijnenburg, Y. A. and Strijers, R. L. and van der Made, Y. and van der Flier, W. M. and Scheltens, P. and Stam, C. J.},
title = {{Functional neural network analysis in frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease using EEG and graph theory}},
journal = {BMC neuroscience},
year = {2009},
doi = {10.1186/1471-2202-10-101},
pmid = {19698093},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2202-10-101}
}