| 21. |
|
|
| 22. |
- Ge, R, et al.
(författare)
-
Normative Modeling of Brain Morphometry Across the Lifespan Using CentileBrain: Algorithm Benchmarking and Model Optimization
- 2023
-
Ingår i: bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology. - : Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- Background: Normative modeling is a statistical approach to quantify the degree to which a particular individual-level measure deviates from the pattern observed in a normative reference population. When applied to human brain morphometric measures it has the potential to inform about the significance of normative deviations for health and disease. Normative models can be implemented using a variety of algorithms that have not been systematically appraised. Methods: To address this gap, eight algorithms were compared in terms of performance and computational efficiency using brain regional morphometric data from 37,407 healthy individuals (53% female; aged 3-90 years) collated from 87 international MRI datasets. Performance was assessed with the mean absolute error (MAE) and computational efficiency was inferred from central processing unit (CPU) time. The algorithms evaluated were Ordinary Least Squares Regression (OLSR), Bayesian Linear Regression (BLR), Generalized Additive Models for Location, Scale, and Shape (GAMLSS), Parametric Lambda, Mu, Sigma (LMS), Gaussian Process Regression (GPR), Warped Bayesian Linear Regression (WBLG), Hierarchical Bayesian Regression (HBR), and Multivariable Fractional Polynomial Regression (MFPR). Model optimization involved testing nine covariate combinations pertaining to acquisition features, parcellation software versions, and global neuroimaging measures (i.e., total intracranial volume, mean cortical thickness, and mean cortical surface area). Findings: Statistical comparisons across models at PFDR<0.05 indicated that the MFPR-derived sex- and region-specific models with nonlinear polynomials for age and linear effects of global measures had superior predictive accuracy; the range of the MAE of the models of regional subcortical volumes was 70-520 mm3 and the corresponding ranges for regional cortical thickness and regional cortical surface area were 0.09-0.26 mm and 24-560 mm2, respectively. The MFPR-derived models were also computationally more efficient with a CPU time below one second compared to a range of 2 seconds to 60 minutes for the other algorithms. The performance of all sex- and region-specific MFPR models plateaued at sample sizes exceeding 3,000 and showed comparable MAEs across distinct 10-year age-bins covering the human lifespan. Interpretation: These results provide an empirically benchmarked framework for normative modeling of brain morphometry that is useful for interpreting prior literature and supporting future study designs. The model and tools described here are freely available through CentileBrain (https://centilebrain.org/), a user-friendly web platform.
|
|
| 23. |
- James, SL, et al.
(författare)
-
Estimating global injuries morbidity and mortality: methods and data used in the Global Burden of Disease 2017 study
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention. - : BMJ. - 1475-5785. ; 26:SUPP_1Supp 1, s. 125-153
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- While there is a long history of measuring death and disability from injuries, modern research methods must account for the wide spectrum of disability that can occur in an injury, and must provide estimates with sufficient demographic, geographical and temporal detail to be useful for policy makers. The Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2017 study used methods to provide highly detailed estimates of global injury burden that meet these criteria.MethodsIn this study, we report and discuss the methods used in GBD 2017 for injury morbidity and mortality burden estimation. In summary, these methods included estimating cause-specific mortality for every cause of injury, and then estimating incidence for every cause of injury. Non-fatal disability for each cause is then calculated based on the probabilities of suffering from different types of bodily injury experienced.ResultsGBD 2017 produced morbidity and mortality estimates for 38 causes of injury. Estimates were produced in terms of incidence, prevalence, years lived with disability, cause-specific mortality, years of life lost and disability-adjusted life-years for a 28-year period for 22 age groups, 195 countries and both sexes.ConclusionsGBD 2017 demonstrated a complex and sophisticated series of analytical steps using the largest known database of morbidity and mortality data on injuries. GBD 2017 results should be used to help inform injury prevention policy making and resource allocation. We also identify important avenues for improving injury burden estimation in the future.
|
|
| 24. |
|
|
| 25. |
|
|
| 26. |
|
|
| 27. |
|
|
| 28. |
|
|
| 29. |
|
|
| 30. |
|
|
