Machine Learning-Based Prediction of Changes in Behavioral Outcomes Using Functional Connectivity and Clinical Measures in Brain-Computer Interface Stroke Rehabilitation

The goal of this work is to evaluate if changes in brain connectivity can predict behavioral changes among subjects who have suffered stroke and have completed brain-computer interface (BCI) interventional therapy. A total of 23 stroke subjects, with persistent upper-extremity motor deficits, received the stroke rehabilitation therapy using a closed-loop neurofeedback BCI device. Over the course of the entire interventional therapy, resting-state fMRI were collected at two time points: prior to start and immediately upon completion of therapy. Behavioral assessments were administered at each time point via neuropsychological testing to collect measures on Action Research Arm Test, Nine-Hole Peg Test, Barthel Index and Stroke Impact Scale. Resting-state functional connectivity changes in the motor network were computed from pre- to post-interventional therapy and were combined with clinical data corresponding to each subject to estimate the change in behavioral performance between the two time-points using a machine learning based predictive model. Inter-hemispheric correlations emerged as stronger predictors of changes across multiple behavioral measures in comparison to intra-hemispheric links. Additionally, age predicted behavioral changes better than other clinical variables such as gender, pre-stroke handedness, etc. Machine learning model serves as a valuable tool in predicting BCI therapy-induced behavioral changes on the basis of functional connectivity and clinical data.

[1]  D. Carroll,et al.  A QUANTITATIVE TEST OF UPPER EXTREMITY FUNCTION. , 1965, Journal of chronic diseases.

[2]  G. Kwakkel,et al.  Probability of regaining dexterity in the flaccid upper limb: impact of severity of paresis and time since onset in acute stroke. , 2003, Stroke.

[3]  Vivek Prabhakaran,et al.  Abstract 6: Resting-state Functional Connectivity Changes After Stroke Rehabilitation Using Closed Loop Neurofeedback , 2015 .

[4]  Robert Tibshirani,et al.  The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction, 2nd Edition , 2001, Springer Series in Statistics.

[5]  Phillip Wolff,et al.  Causal reasoning with forces , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[6]  Joanne M Wagner,et al.  Measurement of upper-extremity function early after stroke: properties of the action research arm test. , 2006, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[7]  R G Radwin,et al.  Evaluation of a modified Fitts law brain–computer interface target acquisition task in able and motor disabled individuals , 2009, Journal of neural engineering.

[8]  M. Corbetta,et al.  Resting interhemispheric functional magnetic resonance imaging connectivity predicts performance after stroke , 2009, Annals of neurology.

[9]  J. Shimony,et al.  Resting-State fMRI: A Review of Methods and Clinical Applications , 2013, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[10]  Mahoney Fi,et al.  FUNCTIONAL EVALUATION: THE BARTHEL INDEX. , 1965 .

[11]  F. J. Carod-Artal,et al.  The Stroke Impact Scale 3.0: Evaluation of Acceptability, Reliability, and Validity of the Brazilian Version , 2008, Stroke.

[12]  D. Mozaffarian,et al.  Executive summary: heart disease and stroke statistics--2012 update: a report from the American Heart Association. , 2012, Circulation.

[13]  N. Birbaumer,et al.  Resting State Changes in Functional Connectivity Correlate With Movement Recovery for BCI and Robot-Assisted Upper-Extremity Training After Stroke , 2013, Neurorehabilitation and neural repair.

[14]  S. Embretson,et al.  The stroke impact scale version 2.0. Evaluation of reliability, validity, and sensitivity to change. , 1999, Stroke.

[15]  Mukesh Dhamala,et al.  Functional organization and restoration of the brain motor-execution network after stroke and rehabilitation , 2015, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[16]  Vivek Prabhakaran,et al.  Changes in functional brain organization and behavioral correlations after rehabilitative therapy using a brain-computer interface , 2014, Front. Neuroeng..

[17]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[18]  L. Cohen,et al.  Brain–machine interfaces in neurorehabilitation of stroke , 2015, Neurobiology of Disease.

[19]  Mark D. Huffman,et al.  Executive Summary: Heart Disease and Stroke Statistics—2015 Update A Report From the American Heart Association , 2011, Circulation.

[20]  Simon B. Eickhoff,et al.  Dynamic intra- and interhemispheric interactions during unilateral and bilateral hand movements assessed with fMRI and DCM , 2008, NeuroImage.

[21]  Alexander J. Smola,et al.  Learning with Kernels: support vector machines, regularization, optimization, and beyond , 2001, Adaptive computation and machine learning series.

[22]  Yong He,et al.  BrainNet Viewer: A Network Visualization Tool for Human Brain Connectomics , 2013, PloS one.

[23]  Tomislav Milekovic,et al.  Low-latency multi-threaded processing of neuronal signals for brain-computer interfaces , 2014, Front. Neuroeng..

[24]  Catherine E Lang,et al.  Relationships and Responsiveness of Six Upper Extremity Function Tests During the First Six Months of Recovery After Stroke , 2009, Journal of neurologic physical therapy : JNPT.