4.6 Article

Structure and dynamics of functional networks in child-onset schizophrenia

期刊

CLINICAL NEUROPHYSIOLOGY
卷 125, 期 8, 页码 1589-1595

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.clinph.2013.11.036

关键词

Cortical networks; Schizophrenia; Child-onset schizophrenia; Complex networks

资金

  1. CNPq [305940/2010-4]
  2. FAPESP [2010/19440-2, 2011/50761-2]
  3. Fapesp
  4. NAP eScience - PRP - USP
  5. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP) [11/50761-2, 10/19440-2] Funding Source: FAPESP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: Schizophrenia is a neuropsychiatric disorder characterized by cognitive and emotional deficits and associated with various abnormalities in the organization of neural circuits. It is currently unclear how and to which extend the global network organization is changed due to such disorder. In this work, we analyzed cortical networks of healthy subjects and patients with child-onset schizophrenia to address this issue. Methods: We performed a comparison of cortical networks extracted from functional MRI data of patients with schizophrenia and healthy subjects considering their topological and dynamical properties. Results: Among 54 network measures tested, only four contributed substantially to a discrimination between the classes of healthy and schizophrenic subjects, with a sensitivity of 90% and specificity of 74%. However, such classes of networks did not differ significantly with respect to the level of network resilience and synchronization. Conclusions: Schizophrenic subjects have cortical regions with higher variance of network centrality, but less modular structure. Significance: Our findings suggest that it is possible to establish data analysis routines that allow automatic diagnosis of a multifaceted disease like child-onset schizophrenia based on fMRI data of individual subjects and extracted network properties. (C) 2013 International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据