PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10336216

Brain imaging technologies: how, what, when and why?

E Gordon
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Innovations in physics and computing technology over the past two decades have provided a powerful means of exploring the overall structure and function of the brain using a range of computerised brain imaging technologies (BITs). These technologies offer the means to elucidate the patterns of pathophysiology underlying mental illness. The aim of this paper is to explore the current status and some of the future directions in the application of BITs to psychiatry. METHOD: Brain imaging technologies provide unambiguous measures of brain structure (computerised tomography and magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and also index complementary measures of when (electroencephalography, event related potentials, magnetoencephalography) and where (functional MRI, single photon emission computed tomography, positron emission tomography) aspects of brain activity occur. RESULTS: The structural technologies are primarily used to exclude a biological cause in cases of a suspected psychiatric disorder. The functional technologies show considerable potential to delineate subgroups of patients (that may have different treatment outcomes), and evaluate objectively the effects of treatment on the brain as a system. What is seldom emphasised in the literature are the numerous inconsistencies, the lack of specificity of findings and the simplistic interpretation of much of the data. CONCLUSION: Brain imaging technologies show considerable utility, but we are barely scratching the surface of this potential. Simplistic over-interpretation of results can be minimised by: replication of BIT findings, judicious combination of complementary methodologies, use of appropriate activation tasks, analysis with respect to large normative databases, control for performance, examining the data'beyond averaging', delineating clinical subtypes, exploring the severity of symptoms, specificity of findings and effects of treatment in the same patients. The technological innovation of BITs still far outstrips the sophistication of their use; it is essential that the meaning and mechanisms underlying BIT measures are always evaluated with respect to prevailing models of brain function across disciplines.

Explore related subjects

BrainElectroencephalographyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingTomography, Emission-ComputedTomography, Emission-Computed, Single-PhotonTomography, X-Ray ComputedJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

E Gordon. 1999. Brain imaging technologies: how, what, when and why?. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1614.1999.00557.x

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2026

A MAGIBU-based model for pediatric and juvenile CNS tumors: an in-house epigenetic decision-support framework compared with online DNA methylation classifiers.

Background: DNA methylation profiling is a tool that provides key support for central nervous system (CNS) tumor classification. However, diagnostically ambiguous pediatric cases may result in discordant outputs across classifiers. We developed MAGIBU, a cross-platform, projection-based framework that embeds individual methylomes into a fixed CNS reference landscape, ranking diagnostic entities by local epigenetic proximity to support clinician-led integrative diagnosis. Methods: As a proof-of-concept, we evaluated MAGIBU in eight morphologically challenging pediatric/juvenile CNS tumors with unresolved diagnoses after institutional and central pathology review. To establish a benchmark in the absence of a definitive histopathological ground truth, a consensus epigenetic reference was defined a priori for cases showing concordant results between the Heidelberg CNS Tumor Methylation Classifier and Methylscape Analysis. Comparisons were also performed with Epigenomic Digital Pathology (EpiDiP). To validate MAGIBU beyond this discovery cohort, performance was assessed at the family level across the CNS methylation spectrum (n = 678, 28 methylation families), on non-array platforms (whole-genome bisulfite sequencing and Oxford Nanopore), and in a focused analysis of the low-grade glioma and diffuse midline glioma compartment across four independent cohorts (n = 670). Results: In the discovery cohort, MAGIBU achieved high concordance with the consensus reference (Cohen's κ = 0.855), outperforming EpiDiP (κ = 0.278), which frequently placed low-grade tumors in proximity to higher-grade reference regions. Conclusions: MAGIBU provides a stable, quantitative differential diagnosis framework that mitigates the limitations of rigid categorical assignments. By leveraging a distance-based proximity metric, it offers a transparent decision-support tool that integrates effectively with clinical, radiological, and molecular data. While performance is inherently dependent on reference atlas composition, MAGIBU represents a robust complementary approach for the diagnostic workup of ambiguous CNS tumors.

Brain↗
PubMed2021

1q21.1 distal copy number variants are associated with cerebral and cognitive alterations in humans.

Low-frequency 1q21.1 distal deletion and duplication copy number variant (CNV) carriers are predisposed to multiple neurodevelopmental disorders, including schizophrenia, autism and intellectual disability. Human carriers display a high prevalence of micro- and macrocephaly in deletion and duplication carriers, respectively. The underlying brain structural diversity remains largely unknown. We systematically called CNVs in 38 cohorts from the large-scale ENIGMA-CNV collaboration and the UK Biobank and identified 28 1q21.1 distal deletion and 22 duplication carriers and 37,088 non-carriers (48% male) derived from 15 distinct magnetic resonance imaging scanner sites. With standardized methods, we compared subcortical and cortical brain measures (all) and cognitive performance (UK Biobank only) between carrier groups also testing for mediation of brain structure on cognition. We identified positive dosage effects of copy number on intracranial volume (ICV) and total cortical surface area, with the largest effects in frontal and cingulate cortices, and negative dosage effects on caudate and hippocampal volumes. The carriers displayed distinct cognitive deficit profiles in cognitive tasks from the UK Biobank with intermediate decreases in duplication carriers and somewhat larger in deletion carriers-the latter potentially mediated by ICV or cortical surface area. These results shed light on pathobiological mechanisms of neurodevelopmental disorders, by demonstrating gene dose effect on specific brain structures and effect on cognitive function.

Brain↗