Let’s take a break: Head motion during fMRI tasks is reduced in children and adults if data acquisition is distributed across sessions or days

Head motion remains a challenging confound in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of both children and adults. Most pediatric neuroimaging labs have developed experience-based, child-friendly standards concerning e.g. the maximum length of a session or the date of mock scanner training. However, it is unclear which factors of child-friendly neuroimaging approaches are effective in reducing head motion. Here, we investigate three main factors including (i) time lag of mock scanner training to the actual scan, (ii) prior scan time, and (iii) task engagement in a dataset of 77 children and 64 adults using a multilevel modeling approach. In children, distributing fMRI data acquisition across multiple same-day sessions reduces head motion. Nevertheless, motion increases over the course of a study, especially in older children. In adults, splitting data acquisition into multiple days, but not same-day sessions, reduces head motion. Moreover, motion is reduced after inside-scanner breaks. In both children and adults, motion increases with run length. Our results suggest that splitting up fMRI data acquisition is an effective tool to reduce head motion in general. At the same time, different ways of splitting up data acquisition benefit children and adults.nnHighlightsO_LIIn children, fMRI data acquisition split into multiple sessions reduces head motionnC_LIO_LIHowever, childrens head motion increases over the duration of the studynC_LIO_LIIn adults, fMRI data acquisition split into several days reduces head motionnC_LIO_LIMoreover, adults motion decreases after inside-scanner breaksnC_LIO_LIIn both children and adults, motion increases with run lengthnC_LI

[1]  Assal Habibi,et al.  Developmental Brain Research With Participants From Underprivileged Communities: Strategies for Recruitment, Participation, and Retention , 2015 .

[2]  K R Thulborn,et al.  Magnetic resonance imaging of children without sedation: preparation with simulation. , 1997, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[3]  D. Veltman,et al.  Preparing children with a mock scanner training protocol results in high quality structural and functional MRI scans , 2010, European Journal of Pediatrics.

[4]  Jonathan D. Power,et al.  Customized head molds reduce motion during resting state fMRI scans , 2018, NeuroImage.

[5]  Tamara Vanderwal,et al.  Inscapes: A movie paradigm to improve compliance in functional magnetic resonance imaging , 2015, NeuroImage.

[6]  H. Schielzeth,et al.  The coefficient of determination R2 and intra-class correlation coefficient from generalized linear mixed-effects models revisited and expanded , 2016, bioRxiv.

[7]  Mark A. Elliott,et al.  Impact of in-scanner head motion on multiple measures of functional connectivity: Relevance for studies of neurodevelopment in youth , 2012, NeuroImage.

[8]  Marieke Langen,et al.  Magnetic resonance simulation is effective in reducing anxiety related to magnetic resonance scanning in children. , 2009, Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

[9]  D. Hu,et al.  Neurobiological basis of head motion in brain imaging , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[10]  Ioana Mihai,et al.  Developmental changes in visual responses to social interactions , 2019, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  K. Slifer,et al.  Operant-contingency-based preparation of children for functional magnetic resonance imaging. , 2002, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[12]  Paul M. Thompson,et al.  Heritability of head motion during resting state functional MRI in 462 healthy twins , 2014, NeuroImage.

[13]  Damien A. Fair,et al.  Behavioral interventions for reducing head motion during MRI scans in children , 2018, NeuroImage.

[14]  Paul C. Johnson Extension of Nakagawa & Schielzeth's R2GLMM to random slopes models , 2014, Methods in ecology and evolution.

[15]  Thomas Zeffiro,et al.  Clinical Functional Image Analysis: Artifact Detection and Reduction , 1996, NeuroImage.

[16]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[17]  Jenifer Juranek,et al.  Children’s head motion during fMRI tasks is heritable and stable over time , 2017, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  M. Achterberg,et al.  Genetic and environmental influences on MRI scan quantity and quality , 2019, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Movement‐Related effects in fMRI time‐series , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[20]  K. Slifer,et al.  Behavior analysis of motion control for pediatric neuroimaging. , 1993, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[21]  T. Zeffiro,et al.  Head movement in normal subjects during simulated PET brain imaging with and without head restraint. , 1994, Journal of nuclear medicine : official publication, Society of Nuclear Medicine.

[22]  L. Freire,et al.  Motion Correction Algorithms May Create Spurious Brain Activations in the Absence of Subject Motion , 2001, NeuroImage.

[23]  Allan L. Reiss,et al.  High success rates of sedation-free brain MRI scanning in young children using simple subject preparation protocols with and without a commercial mock scanner–the Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet) experience , 2014, Pediatric Radiology.

[24]  Sarah Weigelt,et al.  Age-related increase of image-invariance in the fusiform face area , 2018, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[25]  B. Schlaggar,et al.  Considerations for MRI study design and implementation in pediatric and clinical populations , 2015, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[26]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Spurious but systematic correlations in functional connectivity MRI networks arise from subject motion , 2012, NeuroImage.

[27]  Adolf Pfefferbaum,et al.  Design and efficacy of a head-coil bite bar for reducing movement-related artifacts during functional MRI scanning , 1997 .

[28]  Michael Lührs,et al.  Active head motion reduction in magnetic resonance imaging using tactile feedback , 2019, Human brain mapping.

[29]  Y. Yen,et al.  False cerebral activation on BOLD functional MR images: study of low-amplitude motion weakly correlated to stimulus. , 2000, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[30]  Mert R. Sabuncu,et al.  The influence of head motion on intrinsic functional connectivity MRI , 2012, NeuroImage.

[31]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  Benchmarking of participant-level confound regression strategies for the control of motion artifact in studies of functional connectivity , 2017, NeuroImage.

[32]  A. Reiss,et al.  Assessment and prevention of head motion during imaging of patients with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder , 2007, Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging.

[33]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Real-time motion analytics during brain MRI improve data quality and reduce costs , 2017, NeuroImage.

[34]  Koene R. A. Van Dijk,et al.  Less head motion during MRI under task than resting-state conditions , 2017, NeuroImage.

[35]  John Fox,et al.  Visualizing Fit and Lack of Fit in Complex Regression Models with Predictor Effect Plots and Partial Residuals , 2018 .

[36]  Jessica F. Cantlon,et al.  Neural Activity during Natural Viewing of Sesame Street Statistically Predicts Test Scores in Early Childhood , 2013, PLoS biology.

[37]  Sarah Weigelt,et al.  Prolonged functional development of the parahippocampal place area and occipital place area , 2019, NeuroImage.

[38]  Shinichi Nakagawa,et al.  A general and simple method for obtaining R2 from generalized linear mixed‐effects models , 2013 .

[39]  J. Wardle,et al.  Environmental Influences on Children's Physical Activity: Quantitative Estimates Using a Twin Design , 2010, PloS one.