The efficacy of different preprocessing steps in reducing motion-related confounds in diffusion MRI connectomics.

Head motion is a major confounding factor in neuroimaging studies. While numerous studies have investigated how motion impacts estimates of functional connectivity, the effects of motion on structural connectivity measured using diffusion MRI have not received the same level of attention, despite the fact that, like functional MRI, diffusion MRI relies on elaborate preprocessing pipelines that require multiple choices at each step. Here, we report a comprehensive analysis of how these choices influence motion-related contamination of structural connectivity estimates. Using a healthy adult sample (N = 294), we evaluated 240 different preprocessing pipelines, devised using plausible combinations of different choices related to explicit head motion correction, tractography propagation algorithms, track seeding methods, track termination constraints, quantitative metrics derived for each connectome edge, and parcellations. We found that an approach to motion correction that includes outlier replacement and within-slice volume correction led to a dramatic reduction in cross-subject correlations between head motion and structural connectivity strength, and that motion contamination is more severe when quantifying connectivity strength using mean tract fractional anisotropy rather than streamline count. We also show that the choice of preprocessing strategy can significantly influence subsequent inferences about network organization, with the location of network hubs varying considerably depending on the specific preprocessing steps applied. Our findings indicate that the impact of motion on structural connectivity can be successfully mitigated using recent motion-correction algorithms that include outlier replacement and within-slice motion correction.

Consistency and differences between centrality measures across distinct classes of networks.

The roles of different nodes within a network are often understood through centrality analysis, which aims to quantify the capacity of a node to influence, or be influenced by, other nodes via its connection topology. Many different centrality measures have been proposed, but the degree to which they offer unique information, and whether it is advantageous to use multiple centrality measures to define node roles, is unclear. Here we calculate correlations between 17 different centrality measures across 212 diverse real-world networks, examine how these correlations relate to variations in network density and global topology, and investigate whether nodes can be clustered into distinct classes according to their centrality profiles. We find that centrality measures are generally positively correlated to each other, the strength of these correlations varies across networks, and network modularity plays a key role in driving these cross-network variations. Data-driven clustering of nodes based on centrality profiles can distinguish different roles, including topological cores of highly central nodes and peripheries of less central nodes. Our findings illustrate how network topology shapes the pattern of correlations between centrality measures and demonstrate how a comparative approach to network centrality can inform the interpretation of nodal roles in complex networks.