IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0126326.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Accounting for Dynamic Fluctuations across Time when Examining fMRI Test-Retest Reliability: Analysis of a Reward Paradigm in the EMBARC Study

Author

Listed:
  • Henry W Chase
  • Jay C Fournier
  • Tsafrir Greenberg
  • Jorge R Almeida
  • Richelle Stiffler
  • Carlos R Zevallos
  • Haris Aslam
  • Crystal Cooper
  • Thilo Deckersbach
  • Sarah Weyandt
  • Phillip Adams
  • Marisa Toups
  • Tom Carmody
  • Maria A Oquendo
  • Scott Peltier
  • Maurizio Fava
  • Patrick J McGrath
  • Myrna Weissman
  • Ramin Parsey
  • Melvin G McInnis
  • Benji Kurian
  • Madhukar H Trivedi
  • Mary L Phillips

Abstract

Longitudinal investigation of the neural correlates of reward processing in depression may represent an important step in defining effective biomarkers for antidepressant treatment outcome prediction, but the reliability of reward-related activation is not well understood. Thirty-seven healthy control participants were scanned using fMRI while performing a reward-related guessing task on two occasions, approximately one week apart. Two main contrasts were examined: right ventral striatum (VS) activation fMRI BOLD signal related to signed prediction errors (PE) and reward expectancy (RE). We also examined bilateral visual cortex activation coupled to outcome anticipation. Significant VS PE-related activity was observed at the first testing session, but at the second testing session, VS PE-related activation was significantly reduced. Conversely, significant VS RE-related activity was observed at time 2 but not time 1. Increases in VS RE-related activity from time 1 to time 2 were significantly associated with decreases in VS PE-related activity from time 1 to time 2 across participants. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) in VS were very low. By contrast, visual cortex activation had much larger ICCs, particularly in individuals with high quality data. Dynamic changes in brain activation are widely predicted, and failure to account for these changes could lead to inaccurate evaluations of the reliability of functional MRI signals. Conventional measures of reliability cannot distinguish between changes specified by algorithmic models of neural function and noisy signal. Here, we provide evidence for the former possibility: reward-related VS activations follow the pattern predicted by temporal difference models of reward learning but have low ICCs.

Suggested Citation

  • Henry W Chase & Jay C Fournier & Tsafrir Greenberg & Jorge R Almeida & Richelle Stiffler & Carlos R Zevallos & Haris Aslam & Crystal Cooper & Thilo Deckersbach & Sarah Weyandt & Phillip Adams & Marisa, 2015. "Accounting for Dynamic Fluctuations across Time when Examining fMRI Test-Retest Reliability: Analysis of a Reward Paradigm in the EMBARC Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0126326
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126326
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126326
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126326&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0126326?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0126326. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.