PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 15, 2026Diagnostics0 citationsOpen Access

Autistic vs. Control Differences in MRI Scan Quality Across ABIDE-II Sites

View Full Paper
JPJoão PinheiroBABeatriz AfonsoESEmanuel Cortesão Seiça

Key Points

  • This research aims to quantify differences in MRI scan quality between autistic individuals and typically developing controls across multiple sites.
  • Combined Functional MRI Quality Assessment Protocol metrics with phenotypic data from ABIDE-II.
  • Analyzed data from 1277 participants (579 ASD; 698 TD) across 14 sites.
  • Used non-parametric tests and linear mixed-effects models to evaluate group differences.
  • ASD participants showed greater head motion (median mFD = 0.101 vs. 0.081 mm; p < 1 × 10−10).
  • Signal quality differences were minor and mostly due to site effects.
  • Simulated quality-control procedures resulted in higher exclusion rates for ASD participants (31% vs. 18% for TD).

Abstract

Background: Head motion and variability in scan quality remain major methodological challenges in autism neuroimaging. Large multi-site datasets such as ABIDE-II provide a unique opportunity to systematically quantify diagnostic differences in MRI data quality and assess the influence of site-level heterogeneity. Methods: Functional MRI Quality Assessment Protocol (QAP) metrics were combined with phenotypic data from ABIDE-II. Participants were classified as autistic (ASD) or typically developing (TD). Key quality metrics—including mean framewise displacement (mFD), proportion of volumes exceeding 0.20 mm (FD > 0.20), signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), and entropy focus criterion (EFC)—were analyzed alongside age, sex, IQ, and site. Group differences were evaluated using non-parametric tests and linear mixed-effects models with site as a random factor. Additional analyses examined site-level heterogeneity and the impact of quality-control (QC) thresholds on sample composition. Results: The final sample included 1277 participants (579 ASD; 698 TD) across 14 sites. ASD participants exhibited significantly greater head motion (median mFD = 0.101 vs. 0.081 mm; p < 1 × 10−10) and modest reductions in signal quality (lower SNR, higher EFC). Elevated motion in ASD was observed in 12 of 14 sites, although effect sizes varied substantially. Mixed-effects models confirmed that diagnosis remained a significant predictor of motion after adjusting for covariates. In contrast, signal-quality differences were small and largely explained by site effects. Simulated QC procedures disproportionately excluded ASD participants, with exclusion rates up to 31% compared to 18% in TD. Conclusions: ASD participants show consistently higher head motion, while signal-quality differences are minimal and largely site-driven. Standard QC procedures disproportionately exclude ASD individuals, highlighting the need for improved motion handling and more balanced quality-control strategies in multi-site studies.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Pinheiro et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a06b983e7dec685947ac45ahttps://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics16101478
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper