Dear reviewers: Responses to common reviewer critiques about infant neuroimaging studies

Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience

Brittany Howell¹  Roxane Licandro²  M. Catalina Camacho³  Lilla Zöllei⁴  Sarah Shultz⁵  Alice M. Graham⁶  Dustin Scheinost⁶  Marta Korom⁷  Marisa Spann⁸  Courtney A. Filippi⁹  Lucille A. Moore^1,10  Alexander Dufford^1,11 

[1] Biomedical Imaging, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA;Correspondence to: Department of Psychiatry, Ste 1153, 4525 Scott Ave, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.;Correspondence to: Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, 105 The Green, Newark, DE 19716, USA.;Department of Biomedical Imaging and Image-guided Therapy, Computational Imaging Research, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria;A.A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA;Department of Psychiatry, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, OR, USA;Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, University of Delaware, Newark, DE, USA;;Department of Radiology &Division of Biology and Biomedical Sciences (Neurosciences), Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA;Emotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, USA;Institute of Visual Computing and Human-Centered Technology, Computer Vision Lab, TU Wien, Vienna, Austria;

关键词: Baby;    MRI safety;    MRI acquisition;    MRI processing;    Brain development;    FIT’NG;   

DOI  :  

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

The field of adult neuroimaging relies on well-established principles in research design, imaging sequences, processing pipelines, as well as safety and data collection protocols. The field of infant magnetic resonance imaging, by comparison, is a young field with tremendous scientific potential but continuously evolving standards. The present article aims to initiate a constructive dialog between researchers who grapple with the challenges and inherent limitations of a nascent field and reviewers who evaluate their work. We address 20 questions that researchers commonly receive from research ethics boards, grant, and manuscript reviewers related to infant neuroimaging data collection, safety protocols, study planning, imaging sequences, decisions related to software and hardware, and data processing and sharing, while acknowledging both the accomplishments of the field and areas of much needed future advancements. This article reflects the cumulative knowledge of experts in the FIT’NG community and can act as a resource for both researchers and reviewers alike seeking a deeper understanding of the standards and tradeoffs involved in infant neuroimaging.

【 授权许可】

Unknown