Reliability in adolescent fMRI within two years – a comparison of three tasks

• Main Authors: Vetter, Nora C., Steding, Julius, Jurk, Sarah, Ripke, Stephan, Mennigen, Eva, Smolka, Michael N.
• Other Authors: Nature Publishing Group ,
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Saechsische Landesbibliothek- Staats- und Universitaetsbibliothek Dresden 2017
• Subjects: Kognitive Neurowissenschaften; Menschliches Verhalten; Technische Universität Dresden; Publikationsfond; Cognitive neuroscience; Human behaviour; Publishing Fund; ddc:520; rvk:UA 1000
• Online Access: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-230621; http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bsz:14-qucosa-230621; http://www.qucosa.de/fileadmin/data/qucosa/documents/23062/s41598-017-02334-7.pdf

Longitudinal developmental fMRI studies just recently began to focus on within-subject reliability using the intraclass coefficient (ICC). It remains largely unclear which degree of reliability can be achieved in developmental studies and whether this depends on the type of task used. Therefore, we aimed to systematically investigate the reliability of three well-classified tasks: an emotional attention, a cognitive control, and an intertemporal choice paradigm. We hypothesized to find higher reliability in the cognitive task than in the emotional or reward-related task. 104 healthy mid-adolescents were scanned at age 14 and again at age 16 within M = 1.8 years using the same paradigms, scanner, and scanning protocols. Overall, we found both variability and stability (i.e. poor to excellent ICCs) depending largely on the region of interest (ROI) and task. Contrary to our hypothesis, whole brain reliability was fair for the cognitive control task but good for the emotional attention and intertemporal choice task. Subcortical ROIs (ventral striatum, amygdala) resulted in lower ICCs than visual ROIs. Current results add to the yet sparse overall ICC literature in both developing samples and adults. This study shows that analyses of stability, i.e. reliability, are helpful benchmarks for longitudinal studies and their implications for adolescent development.