Human Brain MappingBioinformaticsPeer-reviewed journal article
Brain-Age Prediction: Systematic Evaluation of Site Effects, and Sample Age Range and Size
Yuetong YuiD, H. Cui, Shalaila S. HaasiD, Faye New, Nicole SanfordiD, Kevin YuiD, Denghuang ZhaniD, Guoyuan YangiD, Jia‐Hong GaoiD, Dongtao WeiiD, Jiang QiuiD, Nerisa BanajiD, Dorret Irene BoomsmaiD, Alan F. Breier, Henry BrodatyiD, Randy L. BuckneriD, Jan K. BuitelaariD, Dara M. CannoniD, Xavier CaserasiD, Vincent P. ClarkiD, Patricia ConrodiD, Fabrice CrivelloiD, Eveline A. CroneiD, Udo DannlowskiiD, Christopher G. DaveyiD, , ENIGMA‐Lifespan Working Group
- Citations
- 44
- FWCI
- 10.65
- Field percentile
- top 1%
Abstract
Structural neuroimaging data have been used to compute an estimate of the biological age of the brain (brain-age) which has been associated with other biologically and behaviorally meaningful measures of brain development and aging. The ongoing research interest in brain-age has highlighted the need for robust and publicly available brain-age models pre-trained on data from large samples of healthy individuals. To address this need we have previously released a developmental brain-age model. Here we expand this work to develop, empirically validate, and disseminate a pre-trained brain-age model to cover most of the human lifespan. To achieve this, we selected the best-performing model after systematically examining the impact of site harmonization, age range, and sample size on brain-age prediction in a discovery sample of brain morphometric measures from 35,683 healthy individuals (age range: 5-90 years; 53.59% female). The pre-trained models were tested for cross-dataset generalizability in an independent sample comprising 2,101 healthy individuals (age range: 8-80 years; 55.35% female) and for longitudinal consistency in a further sample comprising 377 healthy individuals (age range: 9-25 years; 49.87% female). This empirical examination yielded the following findings: (1) the accuracy of age prediction from morphometry data was higher when no site harmonization was applied; (2) dividing the discovery sample into two age-bins (5-40 years and 40-90 years) provided a better balance between model accuracy and explained age variance than other alternatives; (3) model accuracy for brain-age prediction plateaued at a sample size exceeding 1,600 participants. These findings have been incorporated into CentileBrain [https://centilebrain.org/#/brainAGE2], an open-science, web-based platform for individualized neuroimaging metrics.
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- Predicting brain-age from multimodal imaging data captures cognitive impairment
Franziskus Liem, Gael P. Varoquaux, … Daniel S. Margulies·NeuroImagePeer-reviewed·Nov 23, 2016
- Mind the gap: performance metric evaluation in brain-age prediction
Ann‐Marie G. de Lange, Melis Anatürk, … James Howard Cole·Human Brain MappingPeer-reviewed·Mar 21, 2022
- Considerations on brain age predictions from repeatedly sampled data across time
Max Korbmacher, Mengyun Wang, … Karsten Specht·Brain and BehaviorPeer-reviewed·Aug 16, 2023
- A Multiverse Approach to Brain Age Prediction: Exploring the Impact of Modality, Bias Adjustment, and Atlas
Jonas Festor, Lars Smolders, Wouter De Baene·bioRxiv·Oct 13, 2026
- Developing a multi-modal neuroimaging-based BrainAge model across childhood
Shi Yu Chan, Pei Huang, … Ai Peng Tan·bioRxiv·May 19, 2026
- Replication and Refinement of Brain Age Model for adolescent development.
Bhaskar Ray, Jiayu Chen, … Jingyu Liu·IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI)Peer-reviewed·May 27, 2024