{"title":"Nine minutes is enough: An accelerated fMRI protocol for reliable connectivity mapping in healthy young adults.","authors":"Adrian Falkowski, Krzysztof Szwed","doi":"10.1080/19585969.2026.2710912","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Resting‑state fMRI is widely used to map brain connectivity, yet the field lacks a clear, data‑driven standard for acquisition duration. We compared traditional Single‑Band (SB) imaging with an accelerated Multiband factor 4 (MB4) protocol to identify a time‑efficient approach for capturing stable network topology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Twenty‑five healthy young adults completed two sessions one month apart, each including counterbalanced 13‑minute SB and MB4 scans. Test-retest reliability was evaluated across multiple durations using Portrait Divergence, a multiscale graph‑theoretic metric. Supplementary analyses compared Portrait Divergence with the field-standard Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, assessed robustness across preprocessing pipelines and parcellation schemes, and examined MB4's ability to capture both cortical and subcortical connectivity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>MB4 consistently outperformed SB across all tested durations, with peak topological stability at 9 minutes. Stability declined beyond this point, likely due to cumulative motion artefacts. Supplementary analyses confirmed MB4's robustness across preprocessing strategies and atlas choices and demonstrated effective whole‑brain coverage.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In healthy young adults, MB4 captures network topology more effectively than SB and reaches peak stability at 9 minutes before declining, challenging the assumption that longer scans are always better. These findings require validation in clinical, paediatric, and geriatric cohorts.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"29 1","pages":"24-31"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2027-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13670261/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19585969.2026.2710912","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/10/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Resting‑state fMRI is widely used to map brain connectivity, yet the field lacks a clear, data‑driven standard for acquisition duration. We compared traditional Single‑Band (SB) imaging with an accelerated Multiband factor 4 (MB4) protocol to identify a time‑efficient approach for capturing stable network topology.
Methods: Twenty‑five healthy young adults completed two sessions one month apart, each including counterbalanced 13‑minute SB and MB4 scans. Test-retest reliability was evaluated across multiple durations using Portrait Divergence, a multiscale graph‑theoretic metric. Supplementary analyses compared Portrait Divergence with the field-standard Intraclass Correlation Coefficient, assessed robustness across preprocessing pipelines and parcellation schemes, and examined MB4's ability to capture both cortical and subcortical connectivity.
Results: MB4 consistently outperformed SB across all tested durations, with peak topological stability at 9 minutes. Stability declined beyond this point, likely due to cumulative motion artefacts. Supplementary analyses confirmed MB4's robustness across preprocessing strategies and atlas choices and demonstrated effective whole‑brain coverage.
Conclusions: In healthy young adults, MB4 captures network topology more effectively than SB and reaches peak stability at 9 minutes before declining, challenging the assumption that longer scans are always better. These findings require validation in clinical, paediatric, and geriatric cohorts.
期刊介绍:
Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience (DCNS) endeavors to bridge the gap between clinical neuropsychiatry and the neurosciences by offering state-of-the-art information and original insights into pertinent clinical, biological, and therapeutic aspects. As an open access journal, DCNS ensures accessibility to its content for all interested parties. Each issue is curated to include expert reviews, original articles, and brief reports, carefully selected to offer a comprehensive understanding of the evolving landscape in clinical neuroscience. Join us in advancing knowledge and fostering dialogue in this dynamic field.