Susceptibility or Resilience to Maltreatment Can Be Explained by Specific Differences in Brain Network Architecture
Kyoko Ohashi1, Carl M Anderson2, Elizabeth A Bolger2
1Developmental Biopsychiatry Research Program, McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts; Brain Imaging Center, McLean Hospital, Belmont, Massachusetts; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
Background:
Childhood maltreatment is a major risk factor for psychopathology. However, some maltreated individuals appear remarkably resilient to the psychiatric effects while manifesting the same array of brain abnormalities as maltreated individuals with psychopathology. Hence, a critical aim is to identify compensatory brain alterations that enable resilient individuals to maintain mental well-being despite alterations in stress-susceptible regions.
Methods:
Network models were constructed from diffusion tensor imaging and tractography in physically healthy unmedicated 18- to 25-year-old participants (N = 342, n = 192 maltreated) to develop network-based explanatory models.
Results:
First, we determined that susceptible and resilient individuals had the same alterations in global fiber stream network architecture using two different definitions of resilience: 1) no lifetime history of Axis I or II disorders, and 2) no clinically significant symptoms of anxiety, depression, anger-hostility, or somatization. Second, we confirmed an a priori hypothesis that right amygdala nodal efficiency was lower in asymptomatic resilient than in susceptible participants or control subjects. Third, we identified eight other nodes with reduced nodal efficiency in resilient individuals and showed that nodal efficiency moderated the relationship between maltreatment and psychopathology. Fourth, we found that models based on global network architecture and nodal efficiency could delineate group membership (control, susceptible, resilient) with 75%, 82%, and 80% cross-validated accuracy.
Conclusions:
Together these findings suggest that sparse fiber networks with increased small-worldness following maltreatment render individuals vulnerable to psychopathology if abnormalities occur in specific nodes, but that decreased ability of certain nodes to propagate information throughout the network mitigates the effects and leads to resilience.
More Related Videos
09:01A Method for Investigating Age-related Differences in the Functional Connectivity of Cognitive Control Networks Associated with Dimensional Change Card Sort Performance
Published on: May 7, 2014
05:55Modeling the Functional Network for Spatial Navigation in the Human Brain
Published on: October 13, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Protein Networks
These interactions can be represented through maps depicting protein-protein interaction networks, represented as nodes and edges. Nodes are circles that are representative of a protein,...
Magnetic Susceptibility and Permeability
When diamagnetic materials are placed under an external magnetic field, the moments opposite to the field are induced. Hence, the susceptibility for diamagnets has a minimal negative value of 10-5–10-6. Since...
Network Covalent Solids
To break or to melt a covalent network solid, covalent bonds must be broken. Because covalent bonds are relatively strong, covalent network solids are typically...
Electric Potential and Potential Difference
When a test charge moves from the initial to the final position, the electric potential difference between those positions is defined as the ratio of the change in the potential energy to the charge on the...
Difference from Background: Limit of Detection
The LOD indicates the presence or absence...
Identifying Statistically Significant Differences: The F-Test
