A Methodological Checklist for fMRI Drug Cue Reactivity Studies: Development and Expert Consensus

Author:

Ekhtiari HamedORCID,Zare-Bidoky MehranORCID,Sangchooli ArshiyaORCID,Janes Amy C.,Kaufman Marc J.,Oliver Jason A.,Prisciandaro James J.,Wüstenberg Torsten,Anton Raymond F.ORCID,Bach PatrickORCID,Baldacchino AlexORCID,Beck Anne,Bjork James M.,Brewer JudsonORCID,Childress Anna Rose,Claus Eric D.,Courtney Kelly E.,Ebrahimi MohsenORCID,Filbey Francesca M.ORCID,Ghahremani Dara G.ORCID,Azbari Peyman GhobadiORCID,Goldstein Rita Z.ORCID,Goudriaan Anna E.,Grodin Erica N.ORCID,Hamilton J. Paul,Hanlon Colleen A.ORCID,Hassani-Abharian Peyman,Heinz AndreasORCID,Joseph Jane E.,Kiefer FalkORCID,Zonoozi Arash KhojastehORCID,Kober HedyORCID,Kuplicki RayusORCID,Li Qiang,London Edythe D.,McClernon Joseph,Noori Hamid R.ORCID,Owens Max M.,Paulus MartinORCID,Perini IreneORCID,Potenza MarcORCID,Potvin Stéphane,Ray Lara,Schacht Joseph P.ORCID,Seo DongjuORCID,Sinha RajitaORCID,Smolka Michael N.ORCID,Spanagel RainerORCID,Steele Vaughn R.ORCID,Stein Elliot A.,Steins-Loeber SabineORCID,Tapert Susan F.ORCID,Verdejo-Garcia AntonioORCID,Vollstädt-Klein SabineORCID,Wetherill Reagan R.ORCID,Wilson Stephen J.,Witkiewitz KatieORCID,Yuan Kai,Zhang XiaochuORCID,Zilverstand AnnaORCID

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundCue reactivity is one of the most frequently used paradigms in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies of substance use disorders (SUDs). While there have been promising results elucidating the neurocognitive mechanisms of SUDs and SUD treatments, the interpretability and reproducibility of these studies is limited by incomplete reporting of participant characteristics, task design, craving assessment, scanning preparation and analysis decisions in fMRI drug cue reactivity (FDCR) experiments. This hampers clinical translation, not least because systematic review and meta-analysis of published work is difficult. This consensus paper and Delphi study aims to outline the important methodological aspects of FDCR research, present structured recommendations for more comprehensive methods reporting, and review the FDCR literature to assess the reporting of items that are deemed important.MethodsFifty-five FDCR scientists from around the world participated in this study. First, an initial checklist of items deemed important in FDCR studies was developed by several members of the Enhanced NeuroImaging Genetics through Meta-Analyses (ENIGMA) Addiction working group based on a systematic review. Using a modified Delphi consensus method, all experts were asked to comment on, revise or add items to the initial checklist, and then to rate the importance of each item in subsequent rounds. The reporting status of items in the final checklist was investigated in 108 recently published FDCR studies identified through a systematic review.ResultsBy the final round, 38 items reached the consensus threshold and were classified under 7 major categories: “Participant Characteristics”, “General fMRI Information”, “General Task Information”, “Cue Information”, “Craving Assessment Inside Scanner”, “Craving Assessment Outside Scanner” and “Pre- and Post- Scanning Considerations”. The review of the 108 FDCR papers revealed significant gaps in the reporting of the items considered important by the experts. For instance, while items in the “general fMRI reporting” category were reported in 90.5% of the reviewed papers, items in the “pre- and post-scanning considerations” category were reported by only 44.7% of reviewed FDCR studies.ConclusionConsidering the notable and sometimes unexpected gaps in the reporting of items deemed to be important by experts in any FDCR study, the protocols could benefit from the adoption of reporting standards. This checklist, a living document to be updated as the field and its methods advance, can help improve experimental design, reporting, and the widespread understanding of the FDCR protocols. This checklist can also provide a sample for developing consensus statements for protocols in other areas of task-based fMRI.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3