Cohort Profile: The NSPN 2400 Cohort: a developmental sample supporting the Wellcome Trust NeuroScience in Psychiatry Network

Cohort Profile: The NSPN 2400 Cohort: a developmental sample supporting the Wellcome Trust... Why was the cohort set up? Mental and substance use disorders are the leading cause of years lived with disability, worldwide.1 Other than childhood developmental disorders and neurodegenerative dementias of the elderly, most mental health disorders are first manifest in the second and third decades of life during which the highest proportion of total disability adjusted life years occurs due to their enormous impact on normal, adolescent and young adult functioning;1 non-syndromal abnormalities can be identified far earlier in life. The normal human brain undergoes a range of normative developmental process during this extended post-pubertal epoch, but the events that account for the massive increases in risk for mental health disorders remain obscure, something compounded by the questionable validity of current psychiatric nosology. Thus, the development of preventative or disease-modifying approaches remain a distant goal. Recent applied neuroscience advances highlight three pathways of exploration in order to reconstruct nosology2: 1) studying the extent of variation in cognition and behaviour throughout the general population rather than comparing categories of mentally well and mentally ill; 2) investigating brain systems underlying emotion, cognition and behaviour; if these emerge from integration of activity over large-scale brain networks, it should be possible to mechanistically link the variation in psychological phenotypes with differences in underlying brain systems; 3) adopting a developmental perspective to understand optimal/suboptimal trajectories of neurocognition as early as possible within the high risk period. We aimed to link normal and psychopathological variation at the behavioural, cognitive and emotion level to phenotypic variation at the level of brain systems, subverting the traditional division between adult and child/adolescent psychiatry by measuring specified dimensions in healthy volunteers and patients in the age range of 14–24 years. The NSPN 2400 Cohort was established in July 2012 as a collaboration between the University of Cambridge and University College London supported primarily by a strategic award from the Wellcome Trust. Who is in the cohort? The NSPN 2400 Cohort is a general population sample aged 14-24 years conceived to support an accelerated longitudinal design to measure developmental change. This design involves recruitment of multiple, age-adjacent cohorts followed longitudinally for a limited period of time, which permits estimation of trajectory across a wider range of ages more quickly than a single-cohort longitudinal follow-up.3 In addition to its efficiency, bias from attrition can be less problematic given that drop outs in cohorts is related to study duration, highlighting another advantage of the accelerated design.4 The NSPN 2400 Cohort aimed to recruit at least 2000 participants in an age- sex-stratified sample, including equal numbers of males and females for the following five age groups: 14-15, 16-17, 18-19, 20-21, and 22-24.99 years. Participants received a Home Questionnaire Pack (HQP) and Sociodemographic Questionnaire that focused on assessing participants’ mood, behaviour and wellbeing along with demographic characteristics. This was accompanied by an Oragene saliva sampling kit for DNA collection that was returned to the study team by post, together with the completed questionnaires. Two samples with more intensive measures are embedded within the NSPN 2400 Cohort (Figure 1). First, the ‘MRI cohort’ (N = 318) took part in in-unit assessments of brain structure and function, using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as detailed behavioural assessments of cognitive and social cognitive function using computer-based evaluations, clinical assessments and IQ measures. Participants from each age- sex-stratum were invited in equal numbers using the order in which they had been recruited to the 2400 cohort (assumed to be random) until at least 30 from each stratum had been through the assessment. An additional sub-sample (N = 467) participated in the same computational tests of cognitive function and clinical assessments but without the MRI component. Again, these were recruited from the ten age-sex strata as for the MRI cohort, aiming for a sample size of at least 450 additional subjects with detailed cognition measurement and, including the MRI cohort, a total of 750 or more people with the cognitive assessments, This combined sub-sample with cognition measures (the ‘cognition cohort’) comprises 785 people, of which 318 (the MRI cohort) have both MRI and cognition measurements. When resources for taking blood allowed, participants in both cohorts were asked to provide a venous blood sample for future genetic, epigenetic and gene expression. The MRI and cognition cohorts were followed-up on one or two occasions. By the virtue of this design, there are participants that completed all three waves of HQP as well as three in-unit assessments. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide Predicted cascade sampling of study cohorts within the NSPN. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide Predicted cascade sampling of study cohorts within the NSPN. Recruitment The NIHR Primary Care Research Network (PCRN) engaged 50 GP’s to recruit young people using their sex-age registers by sending out invitations (including an expressions of interest form (EoI)) across Cambridgeshire and Greater London (closest proximity to universities leading the study). Schools and Further Education colleges were also engaged to distribute the EoI forms to 14 to 18-year-old participants. The NSPN recruitment team assisted GP’s and schools by providing invitation to participate letters, which were forwarded to potential participant’s home address that remained unknown to the NSPN investigators. Purposive advertisement was also used during recruitment; invitation letters with EoI were sent to those who responded to advertisements that met the age criteria. If an individual wanted to participate they informed NSPN recruitment team over the phone/sent in completed EoI form. The STROBE diagram (Figure 2) shows that an estimated 30,923 EoI forms were distributed within GP’s practices and schools, of which 4170 (13.5%) were returned to the NSPN recruitment team. From the 4170 pool, 3726 people were eligible for further participation. 444 participants were rejected on the basis of the age- sex- strata being sufficiently populated. The Home Questionnaire Pack was sent to all eligible 3726 participants and returned by 65% of them (N = 2402, marking the baseline assessment stage of the NSPN 2400 Cohort. Figure 2 View largeDownload slide STROBE diagram showing the recruitment stages of the NSPN 2400 cohort. EoI = expression of interest; HQP = home questionnaire pack. Figure 2 View largeDownload slide STROBE diagram showing the recruitment stages of the NSPN 2400 cohort. EoI = expression of interest; HQP = home questionnaire pack. How often have they been followed up? The NSPN 2400 Cohort is predicated on an accelerated longitudinal design (Figure 2). Thus, each participant has been invited to provide data on at least two occasions (at baseline and follow-up 1) through the completion of HQPs, and, ideally, on two occasions, thereafter; median interval for return of subsequent questionnaires (inter-quartile range) between baseline and first follow-up was 12 months (11–14 months), and between second and third assessments was 13 months (12-16 months). Figure 2 shows that follow-up 1 yielded a 70% response and follow-up 2 a 47% response rate when compared with HQP baseline. In total, HQP data at three time points were obtained from 1134 participants (as of December 2016). The reasons for non-response could not be determined as non-response equated to participants not returning the HQP; a minority of participants told us they did not want to take part further. Each HQP follow-up was separated by an interval, described as the difference in days between the return date of HQP baseline and the return date of subsequent follow-up questionnaires. A median interval for HQP follow-up 1 was exactly 1 year (365 days) and the Inter-Quartile Range (IQR) was 85 days. For HQP follow-up 2 the median was 2.25 years (823 days) and the IQR was 120 days. The median interval between HQP follow-up 1 and 2 was 1.1 years (405 days) and the IQR was 114.5 days. Sociodemographic characteristics of those that dropped out at each follow-up are provided in Supplementary Materials section 1. In general, no obvious biases were observed in regards to ethnicity, place of birth, parental qualification and number of males/females for participants that did not complete follow-up questionnaires. Table 1 presents number of participants at follow-up 1 for the Cognition and MRI cohorts and time lag between assessments. Table 1 Calculation of participants falling within each quantile (Q) based on the number of days it took them to return the HQP at each wave of assessment HQP baseline  Q1 (0-10 days)  Q2 (11-15 days)  Q3 (16-24 days)  Q4 (25-352 days)  Total N = 2402  N = 601  N = 647  N = 565  N = 590  HQP follow-up 1  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-21 days)  Q3 (22-36 days)  Q4 (37-793 days)  Total N = 1684  N = 464  N = 398  N = 403  N = 419  HQP follow-up 2  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-23 days)  Q3 (24-35 days)  Q4 (36-315 days)  Total N = 1134  N = 293  N = 271  N = 283  N = 287  HQP baseline  Q1 (0-10 days)  Q2 (11-15 days)  Q3 (16-24 days)  Q4 (25-352 days)  Total N = 2402  N = 601  N = 647  N = 565  N = 590  HQP follow-up 1  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-21 days)  Q3 (22-36 days)  Q4 (37-793 days)  Total N = 1684  N = 464  N = 398  N = 403  N = 419  HQP follow-up 2  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-23 days)  Q3 (24-35 days)  Q4 (36-315 days)  Total N = 1134  N = 293  N = 271  N = 283  N = 287  Median number of days from the date the questionnaire was sent to the date it was returned were calculated for each HQP wave. For HQP baseline the median was 15 days and the IQR was 14 days. For HQP follow-up 1 the median was 21 days and the IQR was 23 days. Finally, for the HQP follow-up 2 the median was 23 days and the IQR was 22 days. Table 2 presents number of the NSPN 2400 Cohort participants falling within each quantile using the 0.25%, 0.50% and 0.75% cut offs. Table 2 Participant number and time-lag calculation between baseline and follow-up 1 for the cognition and MRI cohorts   IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1  Cognition cohort  N = 785  N = 568  median time lag: 18.0 months, range: 11.8-31.4 months  MRI cohort  N = 318  N = 234  median time lag: 15.4 months, range: 11.7-28.0 months    IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1  Cognition cohort  N = 785  N = 568  median time lag: 18.0 months, range: 11.8-31.4 months  MRI cohort  N = 318  N = 234  median time lag: 15.4 months, range: 11.7-28.0 months  Cognition cohort retention was 72% and MRI cohort retention was 74%. IUA, in-unit assessment. A Microsoft Access-based Cohort Management System (CMS) was devised to store identifiable data (held on secure, password protected University of Cambridge servers in accordance with the Data Protection Act (1998)). Upon completion of relevant assessments, data for each participant was recorded/transferred to a database using the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) software.5 Following successful transfer and quality checks, data were released for manipulation and analysis in an anonymised form to any researcher that was approved by Principal Investigators. What has been measured? Table 3 below lists the self-report instruments included in Home Questionnaire Pack (HQP) to measure common mental health constructs by focusing on mood, behaviour and general well-being. The Sociodemographic Questionnaire (SQ) was primarily built to reflect questions asked within the 2011 public census to define participant’s family characteristics like ethnicity, highest maternal and/or paternal qualification, current postcode, employment status etc. If a participant was under the age of 18, parental consent was sought for them to participate in the study and complete the HQP. The SQ was completed by the parent if the participant was under-age. Table 3 List of measures available in each NSPN cohort NSPN 2400 cohort  HQP  HQP  HQP  baseline  follow-up 1  follow-up 2  Moods and Feelings Questionnaire1  X  X  X  Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale+  X  X  X  Leyton Obsessional Inventory3  X  X  X  The Antisocial Behaviours Checklista  X  X  X  Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale4  X  X  X  Life Events Questionnaire5  X  X  X  Kessler Psychological Distress Scale6  X  X  X  Antisocial Process Screening Device7  X  X  X  Child and Adolescent Disposition Scale8  X  X  X  Drugs Alcohol and Self Injurya  X  X  X  Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire9  X  X  X  Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale10  X  X  X  Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits11  X  X  X  Barratt Impulsive Scale12  X  X  X  Family Assessment Device (General Family Functioning subscale)13  X  X  X  Friendship Questionnaire14,a  X  X  X  Alabama Parenting Questionnaire15  X  X  –  Measure of Parenting Style16  X  X  –  Positive Parenting Questionnairea  X  X  –  Affective Personalities Questionnaire 7,18,a  –  –  X  Reflective Function Questionnaire19  –  –  X  Sociodemographic Questionnairea  X  Xb  Xb  Padual Inventory – Washington State University Revision20  –  X  X    Cognition cohort  IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1    Cognitive battery module  Orthogonalized Go-NoGo task21  X  X  Roulette task22  X  X  Human Approach-Avoidance task23  X  X  Information Gathering task24  X  X  Two-step task25  X  X  Delegated Intertemporal Discounting task26  X  X  Investor-Trustee task27,28  X  X  Subjective Well-being task29  X  X  Clinical assessment module  Edinburgh Handedness Inventory30  X  –  Child Trauma Questionnaire31  X  X  Tanner Puberty Scale32  X  X  Hormone Question Sheeta  X  X  Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI)33  X  X  Height, weight, waist circumferencea  X  X  Self-report of youth behaviour34  –  X  Snaith Hamilton Pleasure Scale35  –  X  Obsessive Compulsive Inventory Revised36  –  X  SCID 1 (Depression, Suicidal, Mania, Substance Use)37  X  X  SCID 2 (PLIKS: Unusual experience, Hallucination)37  X  X  SCID 3 (PLIKS: Delusions)37  X  X  SCID 4 (Others)37  X  X  NSPN 2400 cohort  HQP  HQP  HQP  baseline  follow-up 1  follow-up 2  Moods and Feelings Questionnaire1  X  X  X  Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale+  X  X  X  Leyton Obsessional Inventory3  X  X  X  The Antisocial Behaviours Checklista  X  X  X  Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale4  X  X  X  Life Events Questionnaire5  X  X  X  Kessler Psychological Distress Scale6  X  X  X  Antisocial Process Screening Device7  X  X  X  Child and Adolescent Disposition Scale8  X  X  X  Drugs Alcohol and Self Injurya  X  X  X  Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire9  X  X  X  Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale10  X  X  X  Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits11  X  X  X  Barratt Impulsive Scale12  X  X  X  Family Assessment Device (General Family Functioning subscale)13  X  X  X  Friendship Questionnaire14,a  X  X  X  Alabama Parenting Questionnaire15  X  X  –  Measure of Parenting Style16  X  X  –  Positive Parenting Questionnairea  X  X  –  Affective Personalities Questionnaire 7,18,a  –  –  X  Reflective Function Questionnaire19  –  –  X  Sociodemographic Questionnairea  X  Xb  Xb  Padual Inventory – Washington State University Revision20  –  X  X    Cognition cohort  IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1    Cognitive battery module  Orthogonalized Go-NoGo task21  X  X  Roulette task22  X  X  Human Approach-Avoidance task23  X  X  Information Gathering task24  X  X  Two-step task25  X  X  Delegated Intertemporal Discounting task26  X  X  Investor-Trustee task27,28  X  X  Subjective Well-being task29  X  X  Clinical assessment module  Edinburgh Handedness Inventory30  X  –  Child Trauma Questionnaire31  X  X  Tanner Puberty Scale32  X  X  Hormone Question Sheeta  X  X  Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI)33  X  X  Height, weight, waist circumferencea  X  X  Self-report of youth behaviour34  –  X  Snaith Hamilton Pleasure Scale35  –  X  Obsessive Compulsive Inventory Revised36  –  X  SCID 1 (Depression, Suicidal, Mania, Substance Use)37  X  X  SCID 2 (PLIKS: Unusual experience, Hallucination)37  X  X  SCID 3 (PLIKS: Delusions)37  X  X  SCID 4 (Others)37  X  X  Measures for the MRI and cognition cohorts are split in Table 3 to reflect the modular approach to in-unit assessments. Detailed description of both cognitive task battery and MRI acquisitions are provided in Supplementary Materials section 2. Figure 3 is an example of number of participants for each age bin that completed Moods and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) as part of HQP. Figure 3 View largeDownload slide Illustration of number of participants who completed Moods and Feeling Questionnaire (MFQ) within each age group at each stage of recruitment (as of October 2016). Italicised N indicate the total number of participants for each age group. Abbreviations: MFQ = Moods and Feelings Questionnaire. Figure 3 View largeDownload slide Illustration of number of participants who completed Moods and Feeling Questionnaire (MFQ) within each age group at each stage of recruitment (as of October 2016). Italicised N indicate the total number of participants for each age group. Abbreviations: MFQ = Moods and Feelings Questionnaire. What has it found? Key findings and publications The NSPN 2400 Cohort representativeness To assess the representativeness of the NSPN 2400 Cohort in terms of the England & Wales youth population, five sociodemographic characteristics were compared with data from the 2011 census extracted from the labour market tables produced by the Office of National Statistics (data queries were run on www.nomisweb.co.uk). Detailed explanation and figures can be found in Supplementary Materials section 3. In summary, the NSPN Cohort: 1) broadly matched the ethnicity to the general population of England & Wales, with mixed and Asian groups slightly over-represented; 2) closely resembled the England & Wales population structure when looking at the proportion of UK vs. non-UK births; 3) NSPN volunteers’ parents were more likely to complete qualifications, which translates to an almost 10% difference in achieving Level 1 to 4 qualification when compared with England & Wales. The percentage of vocational qualifications achieved was very similar; 4) on average across the ages there were 5% more females and 5% fewer males compared to England & Wales; 5) an under-representation within the lowest 1st decile and an over-representation within the 9th highest decile was observed when compared to the distribution of Indicator of Multiple Deprivation6 ranks in England. The remaining deciles are broadly comparable to England. Adolescence is associated with genomically patterned consolidation of the hubs of the human brain connectome As an example of the kind of work linking the cohort with the biological measures in the sub-groups, we have studied developmental changes in the cerebral cortex. We found, consistently in two MRI cohorts, that human brain changes in adolescence were concentrated on the more densely connected hubs of the connectome. These particularly well connected regions were located in association cortex, parts of the brain that support higher order cognitive and social processing. At age 14, hub regions had lower magnetisation transfer (MT) than other cortical areas, indicating lower myelin content, but had greater increases in this measure during the 14 to 24 year period. This suggests that cortical hubs have more prolonged myelination that the rest of the cortex. This topologically focused process of cortical consolidation was associated with expression of genes enriched for normal synaptic and myelin-related processes and risk of schizophrenia. We conclude that consolidation of anatomical network hubs could be important for normal and potentially different for clinically disordered adolescent brain development.7 Gene transcription profiles associated with inter-modular hubs and connection distance in human functional magnetic resonance imaging networks Human functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain networks have a complex topology comprising integrative components, e.g. long-distance inter-modular edges that are theoretically associated with higher biological cost. We estimated intra-modular degree, inter-modular degree and connection distance for each of 285 cortical nodes in multi-echo fMRI data from 38 healthy adults and matched our neuroimaging data with openly available transcriptomic expression measures of more than 20,000 genes. We showed nodes in superior and lateral cortex with high inter-modular degree and long connection distance had local transcriptional profiles enriched for oxidative metabolism and mitochondria, and for genes specific to supragranular layers of human cortex. In contrast, primary and secondary sensory cortical nodes in posterior cortex with high intra-modular degree and short connection distance had transcriptional profiles enriched for RNA translation and nuclear components. We conclude that topologically integrative hubs, mediating long-distance connections between modules, are more costly in terms of mitochondrial glucose metabolism.8 Impulsivity and peer influence study This was the first study analysing data from the cognition cohort. We found that inter-temporal discounting,9 a standard measure of impulsivity in animal and human research, was subject to peer influence even if social or monetary rewards did not motivate participants. Participants shifted their level of impulsivity towards that of experimental ‘partners’ depending on two key characteristics: first, how relevant they felt their partner’s observed choices were; and second, how certain they were about their own tastes in the matter.10 What are the main strengths and weaknesses? Strengths To our knowledge, the NSPN 2400 Cohort is the first to combine the behavioural, cognitive and neuroimaging measures to study the normative development of well-being and mental health in an adolescent/young adult cohort representing the England and Wales general population. Despite the NSPN 2400 being a volunteer sample, we demonstrated that it is broadly representative of the England & Wales youth; therefore, it is reasonable to generalise research findings to a wider population. The accelerated longitudinal design will allow estimation of development (growth curves) describing how self-report, cognitive or MRI measures change as a function of chronological age and gender, and to sketch the developmental trajectory of mental health. To do this, mixed effects models will be used to analyse outcome data, using fixed and random effects for linear and quadratic terms for age, with stratification by gender given that differences between boys and girls are accepted within the relevant literature. Another strength is a relatively good retention rate in the study, particularly at the first follow-up. Currently reported 47% retention rate for the second follow-up may increase as data collection continues. Weaknesses A paradoxical weakness is that participants were volunteers for an intensive study, albeit drawn from a randomly selected population, and volunteers are a unique population, especially psychologically. This sampling bias is perhaps evident as participants were from families with higher parental educational attainment when compared with the general population. This potentially means that, for younger participants in particular, they were encouraged to take part by parents particularly aware of the importance of research. That said, many participants are older and more autonomous. Unfortunately, we did not seek ethical committee approval to collect information on people who expressed interest in the study but did not, subsequently, consent to take part. Furthermore, we were not able to obtain accurate estimations of the population-based sampling frame (e.g. numbers of people in age-sex GP registers) from the PCRN, and we attempted to follow at two years only those we had measured at the one-year follow-up, standard in an accelerated design. Another limitation is that we have no information on the important period of change before the age of 14 years; this intend this to be the focus of further work. Despite best efforts, 53% attrition also means that we do not have the longitudinal information on every participant, which decreases our power to detect long-terms effects and introduces bias. Finally, the cohort is, by design, yet to live through the main period of risk for incident mental illness. Thus, the current emphasis is on characterising developmental styles and variations in the quantitative behavioural, cognitive and neural domains included in the study. It will be some time before the participants are at an age when the full implications of these differences will be known in terms of risk of conventional diagnostic categories. However, the intention is to describe and model developmental processes that transcend these unsatisfactory concepts. Can I get hold of the data? Where can I find out more? The study is committed to open science with the aim to make the anonymised dataset fully available to the research community. The participants have consented to their de-identified data being made available to other researchers. The first step has been to define a concise application process that establishes the bone fides of those making the request, accessible by email to openNSPN@medschl.cam.ac.uk. Requests are reviewed by the investigators. Second, data sets used for all publications involving NSPN are available at URLs to be included in the publication. Finally, the study aspires to making data publically available. This publication is based on data at https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.12547. A process has begun involving participants themselves, ethicists, the funder, lawyers and experts in informatics and research governance in order to establish a framework in which to move as far as possible towards that aspiration. Profile in a nutshell The NSPN 2400 Cohort was established to link normal and psychopathological variation at the behavioural, cognitive and emotion level to phenotypic variation at the level of brain systems, subverting the unhelpful division between adult and child/adolescent psychiatry by measuring specified dimensions in healthy volunteers in the age range of 14–24 years. Participants were recruited in 2012 from Greater London and Cambridgeshire and are broadly representative of England & Wales. Self-reported behavioural data are available at three time-points with questionnaire return rate of 70% at one year follow-up, and 47% at two years when compared with baseline participant number of N = 2402. Cognitive battery data retention rate is 72% and for MRI data is 74% at follow-up 1, with baseline data points for 785 and 318 participants respectively. The NIHR Cambridge BioResource extracted and stores DNA from 2087 saliva samples. Part of each sample will be genotyped using the UK Biobank Axiom Array. This comprises 820,967 genetic markers designed for three domains: markers of specific interest, rare coding variants, and genome-wide coverage. The NSPN 2400 Cohort (measures of mental well-being, demographics and DNA), Cognitive cohort (cognitive tasks measures and clinical assessment) and MRI cohort (structural and functional imaging measures) data will be accessible for collaboration upon agreement with the principal investigators. Enquiries should be submitted to openNSPN@medschl.cam.ac.uk. Funding This study was supported by the Neuroscience in Psychiatry Network, a strategic award from the Wellcome Trust to the University of Cambridge and University College London (095844/Z/11/Z). Additional support was provided by the National Institute for Health (NIHR) Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research & Care East of England, and the Medical Research Council (MRC)/Wellcome Trust Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute. Acknowledgements Neuroscience in Psychiatry Network (NSPN) Consortium author list Principal investigators: Edward Bullmore, Raymond Dolan, Ian M Goodyer, Peter Fonagy, Peter B Jones NSPN (funded) staff: Michael Moutoussis, Tobias Hauser, Petra Vértes, Kirstie Whitaker, Gita Prabhu, Laura Villis, Junaid Bhatti, Becky Inkster, Cinly Ooi, Barry Widmer, Ayesha Alrumaithi, Sarah Birt, Kalia Cleridou, Hina Dadabhoy, Sian Granville, Elizabeth Harding, Alexandra Hopkins, Daniel Isaacs, Janchai King, Danae Kokorikou, Harriet Mills, Ciara O’Donnell, Sara Pantaleone Affiliated scientists: Peter Dyan, Pasco Fearon, Rogier Kievit, Jan Stochl, Anne-Laura van Harmelen References 1 Whiteford HA, Degenhardt L, Rehm J et al.   Global burden of disease attributable to mental and substance use disorders: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet  2013; 382: 1575– 86. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  2 Bullmore E, Sporns O. Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nat Rev Neurosci  2009; 10: 186– 98. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  3 Sliwinski M, Hoffman L, Hofer SM. Evaluating convergence of within-person change and between-person age differences in age-heterogeneous longitudinal studies. Res Hum Dev  2010; 7: 45– 60. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  4 Galbraith S, Bowden J, Mander A. Accelerated longitudinal designs: An overview of modelling, power, costs and handling missing data. Stat Methods Med Res  2017; 26: 374– 98. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  5 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform  2009; 42: 377– 81. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  6 Department for Communities and Local Government. The English Indices of Deprivation 2010. Neighb Stat Release  2011; 1– 20 (1 March 2017, date last accessed). 7 Whitaker KJ, Vértes PE, Romero-Garcia R et al.   Adolescence is associated with genomically patterned consolidation of the hubs of the human brain connectome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A  2016; 113: 9105– 10. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  8 Vértes PE, Rittman T, Whitaker KJ et al.   Gene transcription profiles associated with inter-modular hubs and connection distance in human functional magnetic resonance imaging networks. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci  2016; 371: 735– 69. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   9 Pine A, Shiner T, Seymour B, Dolan RJ. Dopamine, time, and impulsivity in humans. J Neurosci  2010; 30: 8888- 96. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  10 Moutoussis M, Dolan RJ, Dayan P. How people use social information to find out what to want in the paradigmatic case of inter-temporal preferences. PLoS Comput Biol  2016; 12: e1004965. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  11 Angold A, Costello EJ, Messer SC, Pickles A, Winder F, Silver D. The development of a short questionnaire for use in epidemiological studies of depression in children and adolescents. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res  1995; 5: 237– 49. 12 Reynolds CR, Richmond BO. What I think and feel: A revised measure of children’s manifest anxiety. J Abnorm Child Psychol  1997; 25: 15– 20. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  13 Berg CZ, Whitaker A, Davies M, Flament MF, Rapoport JL. The survey form of the Leyton Obsessional Inventory-Child Version: norms from an epidemiological study. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry  1988; 27: 759– 63. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  14 Rosenberg M. Society and the Adolescent Self-image . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   15 Goodyer I, Kolvin I, Gatzanis S. Recent undesirable life events and psychiatric disorder in childhood and adolescence. Br J Psychiatry  1985; 147: 517– 23. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  16 Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ et al.   Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol Med  2002; 32: 959– 76. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  17 Vitacco MJ, Rogers R, Neumann CS. The antisocial process screening device: an examination of its construct and criterion-related validity. Assessment  2003; 10: 143– 50. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  18 Lahey BB, Applegate B, Chronis AM et al.   Psychometric characteristics of a measure of emotional dispositions developed to test a developmental propensity model of conduct disorder. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol  2008; 37: 794– 807. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  19 Raine A. The SPQ: a scale for the assessment of schizotypal personality based on DSM-III-R criteria. Schizophr Bull  1991; 17: 555– 64. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  20 Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R et al.   The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes  2007; 5: 63. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  21 Byrd AL, Kahn RE, Pardini DA. A validation of the inventory of callous-unemotional traits in a community sample of young adult males. J Psychopathol Behav Assess  2013; 35: 20– 34. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   22 Patton JH, Stanford MS, Barratt ES. Factor structure of the Barratt impulsiveness scale. J Clin Psychol  1995; 51: 768– 74. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  23 Epstein NB, Baldwin LM, Bishop DS. The McMaster Family Assessment Device. J Marital Fam Ther  1983; 9: 171– 80. CrossRef Search ADS   24 Goodyer IM, Wright C, Altham PM. Recent friendships in anxious and depressed school age children. Psychol Med  1989; 19: 165– 74. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  25 Essau CA, Sasagawa S, Frick PJ. Psychometric properties of the Alabama parenting questionnaire. J Child Fam Stud  2006; 15: 595– 614. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   26 Parker G, Roussos J, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Mitchell P, Wilhelm K, Austin MP. The development of a refined measure of dysfunctional parenting and assessment of its relevance in patients with affective disorders. Psychol Med  1997; 27: 1193– 203. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  27 Poreh AM, Rawlings D, Claridge G, Freeman JL, Faulkner C, Shelton C. The BPQ: a scale for the assessment of borderline personality based on DSM-IV criteria. J Pers Disord  2006; 20: 247– 60. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  28 Eckblad M, Chapman LJ. Development and validation of a scale for hypomanic personality. J Abnorm Psychol  1986; 95: 214– 22. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  29 Ha C, Sharp C, Ensink K, Fonagy P, Cirino P. The measurement of reflective function in adolescents with and without borderline traits. J Adolesc  2013; 36: 1215– 23. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  30 Burns GL, Keortge SG, Formea GM, Sternberger LG. Revision of the Padua Inventory of obsessive compulsive disorder symptoms: Distinctions between worry, obsessions, and compulsions. Behav Res Ther  1996; 34: 163– 73. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  31 Guitart-Masip M, Huys QJM, Fuentemilla L, Dayan P, Duzel E, Dolan RJ. Go and no-go learning in reward and punishment: Interactions between affect and effect. Neuroimage  2012; 62: 154– 66. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  32 Symmonds M, Wright ND, Bach DR, Dolan RJ. Deconstructing risk: Separable encoding of variance and skewness in the brain. Neuroimage  2011; 58: 1139– 49. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  33 Bach DR, Guitart-Masip M, Packard PA et al.  . Human hippocampus arbitrates approach-avoidance conflict. Curr Biol  2014; 24: 541–4 7. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  34 Moutoussis M, Bentall RP, El-Deredy W, Dayan P. Bayesian modelling of Jumping-to-Conclusions bias in delusional patients. Cogn Neuropsychiatry  2011; 16: 422– 47. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  35 Daw ND, Gershman SJ, Seymour B, Dayan P, Dolan RJ. Model-based influences on humans’ choices and striatal prediction errors. Neuron  2011; 69: 1204– 15. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  36 Moutoussis M, Dolan RJ, Dayan P. How people use social information to find out what to want in the paradigmatic case of inter-temporal preferences. PLoS Comput Biol  2016; 12: e1004965. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  37 Fett AKJ, Shergill SS, Joyce DW et al.   To trust or not to trust: The dynamics of social interaction in psychosis. Brain  2012; 135: 976– 84. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  38 King-Casas B, Sharp C, Lomax-Bream L, Lohrenz T, Fonagy P, Montague PR. The rupture and repair of cooperation in borderline personality disorder. Science  2008; 321: 806– 10. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  39 Rutledge RB, Skandali N, Dayan P, Dolan RJ. A computational and neural model of momentary subjective well-being. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A  2014; 111: 12252-5 7. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  40 Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia  1971; 9: 97– 113. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  41 Fink LA, Bernstein D, Handelsman L, Foote J, Lovejoy M. Initial reliability and validity of the childhood trauma interview: A new multidimensional measure of childhood interpersonal trauma. Am J Psychiatry  1995; 152: 1329– 35. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  42 Desmangles J-C, Lappe JM, Lipaczewski G, Haynatzki G. Accuracy of pubertal Tanner staging self-reporting. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab  2006; 19: 213– 21. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  43 Axelrod BN. Validity of the Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence and other very short forms of estimating intellectual functioning. Assessment  2002; 9: 17– 23. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  44 Olweus D. The revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire for Students . Research Centre for Health Promotion, University of Bergen, 1996. 45 Nakonezny PA, Carmody TJ, Morris DW, Kurian BT, Trivedi MH. Psychometric evaluation of the Snaith-Hamilton pleasure scale in adult outpatients with major depressive disorder. Int Clin Psychopharmacol  2010; 25: 328– 33. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  46 Foa EB, Huppert JD, Leiberg S et al.   The Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory: Development and validation of a short version. Psychol Assess  2002; 14: 485– 96. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  47 Kübler U. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). In: Gellman MD, Turner JR (eds). Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine . New York, NY: Springer New York, 2013. 48 Kundu P, Inati SJ, Evans JW, Luh W-M, Bandettini PA. Differentiating {BOLD} and non-BOLD signals in fMRI time series using multi-echo {EPI}. Neuroimage  2012; 60: 1759– 70. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  49 Weiskopf N, Suckling J, Williams G et al.  . Quantitative multi-parameter mapping of R1, PD*, MT, and R2* at 3T: A multi-center validation. Front Neurosci  2013; 7: 95. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  50 Beaulieu C. The basis of anisotropic water diffusion in the nervous system - A technical review. NMR Biomed  2002; 15: 435- 55. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Epidemiology Oxford University Press

Cohort Profile: The NSPN 2400 Cohort: a developmental sample supporting the Wellcome Trust NeuroScience in Psychiatry Network

Loading next page...
 
/lp/ou_press/cohort-profile-the-nspn-2400-cohort-a-developmental-sample-supporting-uKu9tcccFY
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association.
ISSN
0300-5771
eISSN
1464-3685
D.O.I.
10.1093/ije/dyx117
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Why was the cohort set up? Mental and substance use disorders are the leading cause of years lived with disability, worldwide.1 Other than childhood developmental disorders and neurodegenerative dementias of the elderly, most mental health disorders are first manifest in the second and third decades of life during which the highest proportion of total disability adjusted life years occurs due to their enormous impact on normal, adolescent and young adult functioning;1 non-syndromal abnormalities can be identified far earlier in life. The normal human brain undergoes a range of normative developmental process during this extended post-pubertal epoch, but the events that account for the massive increases in risk for mental health disorders remain obscure, something compounded by the questionable validity of current psychiatric nosology. Thus, the development of preventative or disease-modifying approaches remain a distant goal. Recent applied neuroscience advances highlight three pathways of exploration in order to reconstruct nosology2: 1) studying the extent of variation in cognition and behaviour throughout the general population rather than comparing categories of mentally well and mentally ill; 2) investigating brain systems underlying emotion, cognition and behaviour; if these emerge from integration of activity over large-scale brain networks, it should be possible to mechanistically link the variation in psychological phenotypes with differences in underlying brain systems; 3) adopting a developmental perspective to understand optimal/suboptimal trajectories of neurocognition as early as possible within the high risk period. We aimed to link normal and psychopathological variation at the behavioural, cognitive and emotion level to phenotypic variation at the level of brain systems, subverting the traditional division between adult and child/adolescent psychiatry by measuring specified dimensions in healthy volunteers and patients in the age range of 14–24 years. The NSPN 2400 Cohort was established in July 2012 as a collaboration between the University of Cambridge and University College London supported primarily by a strategic award from the Wellcome Trust. Who is in the cohort? The NSPN 2400 Cohort is a general population sample aged 14-24 years conceived to support an accelerated longitudinal design to measure developmental change. This design involves recruitment of multiple, age-adjacent cohorts followed longitudinally for a limited period of time, which permits estimation of trajectory across a wider range of ages more quickly than a single-cohort longitudinal follow-up.3 In addition to its efficiency, bias from attrition can be less problematic given that drop outs in cohorts is related to study duration, highlighting another advantage of the accelerated design.4 The NSPN 2400 Cohort aimed to recruit at least 2000 participants in an age- sex-stratified sample, including equal numbers of males and females for the following five age groups: 14-15, 16-17, 18-19, 20-21, and 22-24.99 years. Participants received a Home Questionnaire Pack (HQP) and Sociodemographic Questionnaire that focused on assessing participants’ mood, behaviour and wellbeing along with demographic characteristics. This was accompanied by an Oragene saliva sampling kit for DNA collection that was returned to the study team by post, together with the completed questionnaires. Two samples with more intensive measures are embedded within the NSPN 2400 Cohort (Figure 1). First, the ‘MRI cohort’ (N = 318) took part in in-unit assessments of brain structure and function, using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as detailed behavioural assessments of cognitive and social cognitive function using computer-based evaluations, clinical assessments and IQ measures. Participants from each age- sex-stratum were invited in equal numbers using the order in which they had been recruited to the 2400 cohort (assumed to be random) until at least 30 from each stratum had been through the assessment. An additional sub-sample (N = 467) participated in the same computational tests of cognitive function and clinical assessments but without the MRI component. Again, these were recruited from the ten age-sex strata as for the MRI cohort, aiming for a sample size of at least 450 additional subjects with detailed cognition measurement and, including the MRI cohort, a total of 750 or more people with the cognitive assessments, This combined sub-sample with cognition measures (the ‘cognition cohort’) comprises 785 people, of which 318 (the MRI cohort) have both MRI and cognition measurements. When resources for taking blood allowed, participants in both cohorts were asked to provide a venous blood sample for future genetic, epigenetic and gene expression. The MRI and cognition cohorts were followed-up on one or two occasions. By the virtue of this design, there are participants that completed all three waves of HQP as well as three in-unit assessments. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide Predicted cascade sampling of study cohorts within the NSPN. Figure 1 View largeDownload slide Predicted cascade sampling of study cohorts within the NSPN. Recruitment The NIHR Primary Care Research Network (PCRN) engaged 50 GP’s to recruit young people using their sex-age registers by sending out invitations (including an expressions of interest form (EoI)) across Cambridgeshire and Greater London (closest proximity to universities leading the study). Schools and Further Education colleges were also engaged to distribute the EoI forms to 14 to 18-year-old participants. The NSPN recruitment team assisted GP’s and schools by providing invitation to participate letters, which were forwarded to potential participant’s home address that remained unknown to the NSPN investigators. Purposive advertisement was also used during recruitment; invitation letters with EoI were sent to those who responded to advertisements that met the age criteria. If an individual wanted to participate they informed NSPN recruitment team over the phone/sent in completed EoI form. The STROBE diagram (Figure 2) shows that an estimated 30,923 EoI forms were distributed within GP’s practices and schools, of which 4170 (13.5%) were returned to the NSPN recruitment team. From the 4170 pool, 3726 people were eligible for further participation. 444 participants were rejected on the basis of the age- sex- strata being sufficiently populated. The Home Questionnaire Pack was sent to all eligible 3726 participants and returned by 65% of them (N = 2402, marking the baseline assessment stage of the NSPN 2400 Cohort. Figure 2 View largeDownload slide STROBE diagram showing the recruitment stages of the NSPN 2400 cohort. EoI = expression of interest; HQP = home questionnaire pack. Figure 2 View largeDownload slide STROBE diagram showing the recruitment stages of the NSPN 2400 cohort. EoI = expression of interest; HQP = home questionnaire pack. How often have they been followed up? The NSPN 2400 Cohort is predicated on an accelerated longitudinal design (Figure 2). Thus, each participant has been invited to provide data on at least two occasions (at baseline and follow-up 1) through the completion of HQPs, and, ideally, on two occasions, thereafter; median interval for return of subsequent questionnaires (inter-quartile range) between baseline and first follow-up was 12 months (11–14 months), and between second and third assessments was 13 months (12-16 months). Figure 2 shows that follow-up 1 yielded a 70% response and follow-up 2 a 47% response rate when compared with HQP baseline. In total, HQP data at three time points were obtained from 1134 participants (as of December 2016). The reasons for non-response could not be determined as non-response equated to participants not returning the HQP; a minority of participants told us they did not want to take part further. Each HQP follow-up was separated by an interval, described as the difference in days between the return date of HQP baseline and the return date of subsequent follow-up questionnaires. A median interval for HQP follow-up 1 was exactly 1 year (365 days) and the Inter-Quartile Range (IQR) was 85 days. For HQP follow-up 2 the median was 2.25 years (823 days) and the IQR was 120 days. The median interval between HQP follow-up 1 and 2 was 1.1 years (405 days) and the IQR was 114.5 days. Sociodemographic characteristics of those that dropped out at each follow-up are provided in Supplementary Materials section 1. In general, no obvious biases were observed in regards to ethnicity, place of birth, parental qualification and number of males/females for participants that did not complete follow-up questionnaires. Table 1 presents number of participants at follow-up 1 for the Cognition and MRI cohorts and time lag between assessments. Table 1 Calculation of participants falling within each quantile (Q) based on the number of days it took them to return the HQP at each wave of assessment HQP baseline  Q1 (0-10 days)  Q2 (11-15 days)  Q3 (16-24 days)  Q4 (25-352 days)  Total N = 2402  N = 601  N = 647  N = 565  N = 590  HQP follow-up 1  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-21 days)  Q3 (22-36 days)  Q4 (37-793 days)  Total N = 1684  N = 464  N = 398  N = 403  N = 419  HQP follow-up 2  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-23 days)  Q3 (24-35 days)  Q4 (36-315 days)  Total N = 1134  N = 293  N = 271  N = 283  N = 287  HQP baseline  Q1 (0-10 days)  Q2 (11-15 days)  Q3 (16-24 days)  Q4 (25-352 days)  Total N = 2402  N = 601  N = 647  N = 565  N = 590  HQP follow-up 1  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-21 days)  Q3 (22-36 days)  Q4 (37-793 days)  Total N = 1684  N = 464  N = 398  N = 403  N = 419  HQP follow-up 2  Q1 (0-13 days)  Q2 (14-23 days)  Q3 (24-35 days)  Q4 (36-315 days)  Total N = 1134  N = 293  N = 271  N = 283  N = 287  Median number of days from the date the questionnaire was sent to the date it was returned were calculated for each HQP wave. For HQP baseline the median was 15 days and the IQR was 14 days. For HQP follow-up 1 the median was 21 days and the IQR was 23 days. Finally, for the HQP follow-up 2 the median was 23 days and the IQR was 22 days. Table 2 presents number of the NSPN 2400 Cohort participants falling within each quantile using the 0.25%, 0.50% and 0.75% cut offs. Table 2 Participant number and time-lag calculation between baseline and follow-up 1 for the cognition and MRI cohorts   IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1  Cognition cohort  N = 785  N = 568  median time lag: 18.0 months, range: 11.8-31.4 months  MRI cohort  N = 318  N = 234  median time lag: 15.4 months, range: 11.7-28.0 months    IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1  Cognition cohort  N = 785  N = 568  median time lag: 18.0 months, range: 11.8-31.4 months  MRI cohort  N = 318  N = 234  median time lag: 15.4 months, range: 11.7-28.0 months  Cognition cohort retention was 72% and MRI cohort retention was 74%. IUA, in-unit assessment. A Microsoft Access-based Cohort Management System (CMS) was devised to store identifiable data (held on secure, password protected University of Cambridge servers in accordance with the Data Protection Act (1998)). Upon completion of relevant assessments, data for each participant was recorded/transferred to a database using the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) software.5 Following successful transfer and quality checks, data were released for manipulation and analysis in an anonymised form to any researcher that was approved by Principal Investigators. What has been measured? Table 3 below lists the self-report instruments included in Home Questionnaire Pack (HQP) to measure common mental health constructs by focusing on mood, behaviour and general well-being. The Sociodemographic Questionnaire (SQ) was primarily built to reflect questions asked within the 2011 public census to define participant’s family characteristics like ethnicity, highest maternal and/or paternal qualification, current postcode, employment status etc. If a participant was under the age of 18, parental consent was sought for them to participate in the study and complete the HQP. The SQ was completed by the parent if the participant was under-age. Table 3 List of measures available in each NSPN cohort NSPN 2400 cohort  HQP  HQP  HQP  baseline  follow-up 1  follow-up 2  Moods and Feelings Questionnaire1  X  X  X  Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale+  X  X  X  Leyton Obsessional Inventory3  X  X  X  The Antisocial Behaviours Checklista  X  X  X  Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale4  X  X  X  Life Events Questionnaire5  X  X  X  Kessler Psychological Distress Scale6  X  X  X  Antisocial Process Screening Device7  X  X  X  Child and Adolescent Disposition Scale8  X  X  X  Drugs Alcohol and Self Injurya  X  X  X  Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire9  X  X  X  Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale10  X  X  X  Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits11  X  X  X  Barratt Impulsive Scale12  X  X  X  Family Assessment Device (General Family Functioning subscale)13  X  X  X  Friendship Questionnaire14,a  X  X  X  Alabama Parenting Questionnaire15  X  X  –  Measure of Parenting Style16  X  X  –  Positive Parenting Questionnairea  X  X  –  Affective Personalities Questionnaire 7,18,a  –  –  X  Reflective Function Questionnaire19  –  –  X  Sociodemographic Questionnairea  X  Xb  Xb  Padual Inventory – Washington State University Revision20  –  X  X    Cognition cohort  IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1    Cognitive battery module  Orthogonalized Go-NoGo task21  X  X  Roulette task22  X  X  Human Approach-Avoidance task23  X  X  Information Gathering task24  X  X  Two-step task25  X  X  Delegated Intertemporal Discounting task26  X  X  Investor-Trustee task27,28  X  X  Subjective Well-being task29  X  X  Clinical assessment module  Edinburgh Handedness Inventory30  X  –  Child Trauma Questionnaire31  X  X  Tanner Puberty Scale32  X  X  Hormone Question Sheeta  X  X  Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI)33  X  X  Height, weight, waist circumferencea  X  X  Self-report of youth behaviour34  –  X  Snaith Hamilton Pleasure Scale35  –  X  Obsessive Compulsive Inventory Revised36  –  X  SCID 1 (Depression, Suicidal, Mania, Substance Use)37  X  X  SCID 2 (PLIKS: Unusual experience, Hallucination)37  X  X  SCID 3 (PLIKS: Delusions)37  X  X  SCID 4 (Others)37  X  X  NSPN 2400 cohort  HQP  HQP  HQP  baseline  follow-up 1  follow-up 2  Moods and Feelings Questionnaire1  X  X  X  Revised Children’s Manifest Anxiety Scale+  X  X  X  Leyton Obsessional Inventory3  X  X  X  The Antisocial Behaviours Checklista  X  X  X  Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale4  X  X  X  Life Events Questionnaire5  X  X  X  Kessler Psychological Distress Scale6  X  X  X  Antisocial Process Screening Device7  X  X  X  Child and Adolescent Disposition Scale8  X  X  X  Drugs Alcohol and Self Injurya  X  X  X  Schizotypal Personality Questionnaire9  X  X  X  Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale10  X  X  X  Inventory of Callous-Unemotional Traits11  X  X  X  Barratt Impulsive Scale12  X  X  X  Family Assessment Device (General Family Functioning subscale)13  X  X  X  Friendship Questionnaire14,a  X  X  X  Alabama Parenting Questionnaire15  X  X  –  Measure of Parenting Style16  X  X  –  Positive Parenting Questionnairea  X  X  –  Affective Personalities Questionnaire 7,18,a  –  –  X  Reflective Function Questionnaire19  –  –  X  Sociodemographic Questionnairea  X  Xb  Xb  Padual Inventory – Washington State University Revision20  –  X  X    Cognition cohort  IUA baseline  IUA follow-up 1    Cognitive battery module  Orthogonalized Go-NoGo task21  X  X  Roulette task22  X  X  Human Approach-Avoidance task23  X  X  Information Gathering task24  X  X  Two-step task25  X  X  Delegated Intertemporal Discounting task26  X  X  Investor-Trustee task27,28  X  X  Subjective Well-being task29  X  X  Clinical assessment module  Edinburgh Handedness Inventory30  X  –  Child Trauma Questionnaire31  X  X  Tanner Puberty Scale32  X  X  Hormone Question Sheeta  X  X  Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence (WASI)33  X  X  Height, weight, waist circumferencea  X  X  Self-report of youth behaviour34  –  X  Snaith Hamilton Pleasure Scale35  –  X  Obsessive Compulsive Inventory Revised36  –  X  SCID 1 (Depression, Suicidal, Mania, Substance Use)37  X  X  SCID 2 (PLIKS: Unusual experience, Hallucination)37  X  X  SCID 3 (PLIKS: Delusions)37  X  X  SCID 4 (Others)37  X  X  Measures for the MRI and cognition cohorts are split in Table 3 to reflect the modular approach to in-unit assessments. Detailed description of both cognitive task battery and MRI acquisitions are provided in Supplementary Materials section 2. Figure 3 is an example of number of participants for each age bin that completed Moods and Feelings Questionnaire (MFQ) as part of HQP. Figure 3 View largeDownload slide Illustration of number of participants who completed Moods and Feeling Questionnaire (MFQ) within each age group at each stage of recruitment (as of October 2016). Italicised N indicate the total number of participants for each age group. Abbreviations: MFQ = Moods and Feelings Questionnaire. Figure 3 View largeDownload slide Illustration of number of participants who completed Moods and Feeling Questionnaire (MFQ) within each age group at each stage of recruitment (as of October 2016). Italicised N indicate the total number of participants for each age group. Abbreviations: MFQ = Moods and Feelings Questionnaire. What has it found? Key findings and publications The NSPN 2400 Cohort representativeness To assess the representativeness of the NSPN 2400 Cohort in terms of the England & Wales youth population, five sociodemographic characteristics were compared with data from the 2011 census extracted from the labour market tables produced by the Office of National Statistics (data queries were run on www.nomisweb.co.uk). Detailed explanation and figures can be found in Supplementary Materials section 3. In summary, the NSPN Cohort: 1) broadly matched the ethnicity to the general population of England & Wales, with mixed and Asian groups slightly over-represented; 2) closely resembled the England & Wales population structure when looking at the proportion of UK vs. non-UK births; 3) NSPN volunteers’ parents were more likely to complete qualifications, which translates to an almost 10% difference in achieving Level 1 to 4 qualification when compared with England & Wales. The percentage of vocational qualifications achieved was very similar; 4) on average across the ages there were 5% more females and 5% fewer males compared to England & Wales; 5) an under-representation within the lowest 1st decile and an over-representation within the 9th highest decile was observed when compared to the distribution of Indicator of Multiple Deprivation6 ranks in England. The remaining deciles are broadly comparable to England. Adolescence is associated with genomically patterned consolidation of the hubs of the human brain connectome As an example of the kind of work linking the cohort with the biological measures in the sub-groups, we have studied developmental changes in the cerebral cortex. We found, consistently in two MRI cohorts, that human brain changes in adolescence were concentrated on the more densely connected hubs of the connectome. These particularly well connected regions were located in association cortex, parts of the brain that support higher order cognitive and social processing. At age 14, hub regions had lower magnetisation transfer (MT) than other cortical areas, indicating lower myelin content, but had greater increases in this measure during the 14 to 24 year period. This suggests that cortical hubs have more prolonged myelination that the rest of the cortex. This topologically focused process of cortical consolidation was associated with expression of genes enriched for normal synaptic and myelin-related processes and risk of schizophrenia. We conclude that consolidation of anatomical network hubs could be important for normal and potentially different for clinically disordered adolescent brain development.7 Gene transcription profiles associated with inter-modular hubs and connection distance in human functional magnetic resonance imaging networks Human functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) brain networks have a complex topology comprising integrative components, e.g. long-distance inter-modular edges that are theoretically associated with higher biological cost. We estimated intra-modular degree, inter-modular degree and connection distance for each of 285 cortical nodes in multi-echo fMRI data from 38 healthy adults and matched our neuroimaging data with openly available transcriptomic expression measures of more than 20,000 genes. We showed nodes in superior and lateral cortex with high inter-modular degree and long connection distance had local transcriptional profiles enriched for oxidative metabolism and mitochondria, and for genes specific to supragranular layers of human cortex. In contrast, primary and secondary sensory cortical nodes in posterior cortex with high intra-modular degree and short connection distance had transcriptional profiles enriched for RNA translation and nuclear components. We conclude that topologically integrative hubs, mediating long-distance connections between modules, are more costly in terms of mitochondrial glucose metabolism.8 Impulsivity and peer influence study This was the first study analysing data from the cognition cohort. We found that inter-temporal discounting,9 a standard measure of impulsivity in animal and human research, was subject to peer influence even if social or monetary rewards did not motivate participants. Participants shifted their level of impulsivity towards that of experimental ‘partners’ depending on two key characteristics: first, how relevant they felt their partner’s observed choices were; and second, how certain they were about their own tastes in the matter.10 What are the main strengths and weaknesses? Strengths To our knowledge, the NSPN 2400 Cohort is the first to combine the behavioural, cognitive and neuroimaging measures to study the normative development of well-being and mental health in an adolescent/young adult cohort representing the England and Wales general population. Despite the NSPN 2400 being a volunteer sample, we demonstrated that it is broadly representative of the England & Wales youth; therefore, it is reasonable to generalise research findings to a wider population. The accelerated longitudinal design will allow estimation of development (growth curves) describing how self-report, cognitive or MRI measures change as a function of chronological age and gender, and to sketch the developmental trajectory of mental health. To do this, mixed effects models will be used to analyse outcome data, using fixed and random effects for linear and quadratic terms for age, with stratification by gender given that differences between boys and girls are accepted within the relevant literature. Another strength is a relatively good retention rate in the study, particularly at the first follow-up. Currently reported 47% retention rate for the second follow-up may increase as data collection continues. Weaknesses A paradoxical weakness is that participants were volunteers for an intensive study, albeit drawn from a randomly selected population, and volunteers are a unique population, especially psychologically. This sampling bias is perhaps evident as participants were from families with higher parental educational attainment when compared with the general population. This potentially means that, for younger participants in particular, they were encouraged to take part by parents particularly aware of the importance of research. That said, many participants are older and more autonomous. Unfortunately, we did not seek ethical committee approval to collect information on people who expressed interest in the study but did not, subsequently, consent to take part. Furthermore, we were not able to obtain accurate estimations of the population-based sampling frame (e.g. numbers of people in age-sex GP registers) from the PCRN, and we attempted to follow at two years only those we had measured at the one-year follow-up, standard in an accelerated design. Another limitation is that we have no information on the important period of change before the age of 14 years; this intend this to be the focus of further work. Despite best efforts, 53% attrition also means that we do not have the longitudinal information on every participant, which decreases our power to detect long-terms effects and introduces bias. Finally, the cohort is, by design, yet to live through the main period of risk for incident mental illness. Thus, the current emphasis is on characterising developmental styles and variations in the quantitative behavioural, cognitive and neural domains included in the study. It will be some time before the participants are at an age when the full implications of these differences will be known in terms of risk of conventional diagnostic categories. However, the intention is to describe and model developmental processes that transcend these unsatisfactory concepts. Can I get hold of the data? Where can I find out more? The study is committed to open science with the aim to make the anonymised dataset fully available to the research community. The participants have consented to their de-identified data being made available to other researchers. The first step has been to define a concise application process that establishes the bone fides of those making the request, accessible by email to openNSPN@medschl.cam.ac.uk. Requests are reviewed by the investigators. Second, data sets used for all publications involving NSPN are available at URLs to be included in the publication. Finally, the study aspires to making data publically available. This publication is based on data at https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.12547. A process has begun involving participants themselves, ethicists, the funder, lawyers and experts in informatics and research governance in order to establish a framework in which to move as far as possible towards that aspiration. Profile in a nutshell The NSPN 2400 Cohort was established to link normal and psychopathological variation at the behavioural, cognitive and emotion level to phenotypic variation at the level of brain systems, subverting the unhelpful division between adult and child/adolescent psychiatry by measuring specified dimensions in healthy volunteers in the age range of 14–24 years. Participants were recruited in 2012 from Greater London and Cambridgeshire and are broadly representative of England & Wales. Self-reported behavioural data are available at three time-points with questionnaire return rate of 70% at one year follow-up, and 47% at two years when compared with baseline participant number of N = 2402. Cognitive battery data retention rate is 72% and for MRI data is 74% at follow-up 1, with baseline data points for 785 and 318 participants respectively. The NIHR Cambridge BioResource extracted and stores DNA from 2087 saliva samples. Part of each sample will be genotyped using the UK Biobank Axiom Array. This comprises 820,967 genetic markers designed for three domains: markers of specific interest, rare coding variants, and genome-wide coverage. The NSPN 2400 Cohort (measures of mental well-being, demographics and DNA), Cognitive cohort (cognitive tasks measures and clinical assessment) and MRI cohort (structural and functional imaging measures) data will be accessible for collaboration upon agreement with the principal investigators. Enquiries should be submitted to openNSPN@medschl.cam.ac.uk. Funding This study was supported by the Neuroscience in Psychiatry Network, a strategic award from the Wellcome Trust to the University of Cambridge and University College London (095844/Z/11/Z). Additional support was provided by the National Institute for Health (NIHR) Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research & Care East of England, and the Medical Research Council (MRC)/Wellcome Trust Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute. Acknowledgements Neuroscience in Psychiatry Network (NSPN) Consortium author list Principal investigators: Edward Bullmore, Raymond Dolan, Ian M Goodyer, Peter Fonagy, Peter B Jones NSPN (funded) staff: Michael Moutoussis, Tobias Hauser, Petra Vértes, Kirstie Whitaker, Gita Prabhu, Laura Villis, Junaid Bhatti, Becky Inkster, Cinly Ooi, Barry Widmer, Ayesha Alrumaithi, Sarah Birt, Kalia Cleridou, Hina Dadabhoy, Sian Granville, Elizabeth Harding, Alexandra Hopkins, Daniel Isaacs, Janchai King, Danae Kokorikou, Harriet Mills, Ciara O’Donnell, Sara Pantaleone Affiliated scientists: Peter Dyan, Pasco Fearon, Rogier Kievit, Jan Stochl, Anne-Laura van Harmelen References 1 Whiteford HA, Degenhardt L, Rehm J et al.   Global burden of disease attributable to mental and substance use disorders: findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet  2013; 382: 1575– 86. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  2 Bullmore E, Sporns O. Complex brain networks: graph theoretical analysis of structural and functional systems. Nat Rev Neurosci  2009; 10: 186– 98. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  3 Sliwinski M, Hoffman L, Hofer SM. Evaluating convergence of within-person change and between-person age differences in age-heterogeneous longitudinal studies. Res Hum Dev  2010; 7: 45– 60. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  4 Galbraith S, Bowden J, Mander A. Accelerated longitudinal designs: An overview of modelling, power, costs and handling missing data. Stat Methods Med Res  2017; 26: 374– 98. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  5 Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG. Research electronic data capture (REDCap) - A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform  2009; 42: 377– 81. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  6 Department for Communities and Local Government. The English Indices of Deprivation 2010. Neighb Stat Release  2011; 1– 20 (1 March 2017, date last accessed). 7 Whitaker KJ, Vértes PE, Romero-Garcia R et al.   Adolescence is associated with genomically patterned consolidation of the hubs of the human brain connectome. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A  2016; 113: 9105– 10. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  8 Vértes PE, Rittman T, Whitaker KJ et al.   Gene transcription profiles associated with inter-modular hubs and connection distance in human functional magnetic resonance imaging networks. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci  2016; 371: 735– 69. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   9 Pine A, Shiner T, Seymour B, Dolan RJ. Dopamine, time, and impulsivity in humans. J Neurosci  2010; 30: 8888- 96. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  10 Moutoussis M, Dolan RJ, Dayan P. How people use social information to find out what to want in the paradigmatic case of inter-temporal preferences. PLoS Comput Biol  2016; 12: e1004965. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  11 Angold A, Costello EJ, Messer SC, Pickles A, Winder F, Silver D. The development of a short questionnaire for use in epidemiological studies of depression in children and adolescents. Int J Methods Psychiatr Res  1995; 5: 237– 49. 12 Reynolds CR, Richmond BO. What I think and feel: A revised measure of children’s manifest anxiety. J Abnorm Child Psychol  1997; 25: 15– 20. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  13 Berg CZ, Whitaker A, Davies M, Flament MF, Rapoport JL. The survey form of the Leyton Obsessional Inventory-Child Version: norms from an epidemiological study. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry  1988; 27: 759– 63. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  14 Rosenberg M. Society and the Adolescent Self-image . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   15 Goodyer I, Kolvin I, Gatzanis S. Recent undesirable life events and psychiatric disorder in childhood and adolescence. Br J Psychiatry  1985; 147: 517– 23. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  16 Kessler RC, Andrews G, Colpe LJ et al.   Short screening scales to monitor population prevalences and trends in non-specific psychological distress. Psychol Med  2002; 32: 959– 76. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  17 Vitacco MJ, Rogers R, Neumann CS. The antisocial process screening device: an examination of its construct and criterion-related validity. Assessment  2003; 10: 143– 50. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  18 Lahey BB, Applegate B, Chronis AM et al.   Psychometric characteristics of a measure of emotional dispositions developed to test a developmental propensity model of conduct disorder. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol  2008; 37: 794– 807. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  19 Raine A. The SPQ: a scale for the assessment of schizotypal personality based on DSM-III-R criteria. Schizophr Bull  1991; 17: 555– 64. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  20 Tennant R, Hiller L, Fishwick R et al.   The Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS): development and UK validation. Health Qual Life Outcomes  2007; 5: 63. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  21 Byrd AL, Kahn RE, Pardini DA. A validation of the inventory of callous-unemotional traits in a community sample of young adult males. J Psychopathol Behav Assess  2013; 35: 20– 34. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   22 Patton JH, Stanford MS, Barratt ES. Factor structure of the Barratt impulsiveness scale. J Clin Psychol  1995; 51: 768– 74. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  23 Epstein NB, Baldwin LM, Bishop DS. The McMaster Family Assessment Device. J Marital Fam Ther  1983; 9: 171– 80. CrossRef Search ADS   24 Goodyer IM, Wright C, Altham PM. Recent friendships in anxious and depressed school age children. Psychol Med  1989; 19: 165– 74. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  25 Essau CA, Sasagawa S, Frick PJ. Psychometric properties of the Alabama parenting questionnaire. J Child Fam Stud  2006; 15: 595– 614. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS   26 Parker G, Roussos J, Hadzi-Pavlovic D, Mitchell P, Wilhelm K, Austin MP. The development of a refined measure of dysfunctional parenting and assessment of its relevance in patients with affective disorders. Psychol Med  1997; 27: 1193– 203. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  27 Poreh AM, Rawlings D, Claridge G, Freeman JL, Faulkner C, Shelton C. The BPQ: a scale for the assessment of borderline personality based on DSM-IV criteria. J Pers Disord  2006; 20: 247– 60. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  28 Eckblad M, Chapman LJ. Development and validation of a scale for hypomanic personality. J Abnorm Psychol  1986; 95: 214– 22. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  29 Ha C, Sharp C, Ensink K, Fonagy P, Cirino P. The measurement of reflective function in adolescents with and without borderline traits. J Adolesc  2013; 36: 1215– 23. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  30 Burns GL, Keortge SG, Formea GM, Sternberger LG. Revision of the Padua Inventory of obsessive compulsive disorder symptoms: Distinctions between worry, obsessions, and compulsions. Behav Res Ther  1996; 34: 163– 73. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  31 Guitart-Masip M, Huys QJM, Fuentemilla L, Dayan P, Duzel E, Dolan RJ. Go and no-go learning in reward and punishment: Interactions between affect and effect. Neuroimage  2012; 62: 154– 66. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  32 Symmonds M, Wright ND, Bach DR, Dolan RJ. Deconstructing risk: Separable encoding of variance and skewness in the brain. Neuroimage  2011; 58: 1139– 49. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  33 Bach DR, Guitart-Masip M, Packard PA et al.  . Human hippocampus arbitrates approach-avoidance conflict. Curr Biol  2014; 24: 541–4 7. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  34 Moutoussis M, Bentall RP, El-Deredy W, Dayan P. Bayesian modelling of Jumping-to-Conclusions bias in delusional patients. Cogn Neuropsychiatry  2011; 16: 422– 47. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  35 Daw ND, Gershman SJ, Seymour B, Dayan P, Dolan RJ. Model-based influences on humans’ choices and striatal prediction errors. Neuron  2011; 69: 1204– 15. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  36 Moutoussis M, Dolan RJ, Dayan P. How people use social information to find out what to want in the paradigmatic case of inter-temporal preferences. PLoS Comput Biol  2016; 12: e1004965. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  37 Fett AKJ, Shergill SS, Joyce DW et al.   To trust or not to trust: The dynamics of social interaction in psychosis. Brain  2012; 135: 976– 84. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  38 King-Casas B, Sharp C, Lomax-Bream L, Lohrenz T, Fonagy P, Montague PR. The rupture and repair of cooperation in borderline personality disorder. Science  2008; 321: 806– 10. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  39 Rutledge RB, Skandali N, Dayan P, Dolan RJ. A computational and neural model of momentary subjective well-being. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A  2014; 111: 12252-5 7. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  40 Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia  1971; 9: 97– 113. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  41 Fink LA, Bernstein D, Handelsman L, Foote J, Lovejoy M. Initial reliability and validity of the childhood trauma interview: A new multidimensional measure of childhood interpersonal trauma. Am J Psychiatry  1995; 152: 1329– 35. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  42 Desmangles J-C, Lappe JM, Lipaczewski G, Haynatzki G. Accuracy of pubertal Tanner staging self-reporting. J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab  2006; 19: 213– 21. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  43 Axelrod BN. Validity of the Wechsler abbreviated scale of intelligence and other very short forms of estimating intellectual functioning. Assessment  2002; 9: 17– 23. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  44 Olweus D. The revised Olweus Bully/Victim Questionnaire for Students . Research Centre for Health Promotion, University of Bergen, 1996. 45 Nakonezny PA, Carmody TJ, Morris DW, Kurian BT, Trivedi MH. Psychometric evaluation of the Snaith-Hamilton pleasure scale in adult outpatients with major depressive disorder. Int Clin Psychopharmacol  2010; 25: 328– 33. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  46 Foa EB, Huppert JD, Leiberg S et al.   The Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory: Development and validation of a short version. Psychol Assess  2002; 14: 485– 96. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  47 Kübler U. Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). In: Gellman MD, Turner JR (eds). Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine . New York, NY: Springer New York, 2013. 48 Kundu P, Inati SJ, Evans JW, Luh W-M, Bandettini PA. Differentiating {BOLD} and non-BOLD signals in fMRI time series using multi-echo {EPI}. Neuroimage  2012; 60: 1759– 70. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  49 Weiskopf N, Suckling J, Williams G et al.  . Quantitative multi-parameter mapping of R1, PD*, MT, and R2* at 3T: A multi-center validation. Front Neurosci  2013; 7: 95. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  50 Beaulieu C. The basis of anisotropic water diffusion in the nervous system - A technical review. NMR Biomed  2002; 15: 435- 55. Google Scholar CrossRef Search ADS PubMed  © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Journal

International Journal of EpidemiologyOxford University Press

Published: Feb 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

Monthly Plan

  • Read unlimited articles
  • Personalized recommendations
  • No expiration
  • Print 20 pages per month
  • 20% off on PDF purchases
  • Organize your research
  • Get updates on your journals and topic searches

$49/month

Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial

Best Deal — 39% off

Annual Plan

  • All the features of the Professional Plan, but for 39% off!
  • Billed annually
  • No expiration
  • For the normal price of 10 articles elsewhere, you get one full year of unlimited access to articles.

$588

$360/year

billed annually
Start Free Trial

14-day Free Trial