Longitudinal fNIRS and EEG metrics of habituation and novelty detection are correlated in 1-18-month-old infants.


Journal

NeuroImage
ISSN: 1095-9572
Titre abrégé: Neuroimage
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9215515

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 07 2023
Historique:
received: 19 01 2023
revised: 06 04 2023
accepted: 01 05 2023
medline: 17 5 2023
pubmed: 6 5 2023
entrez: 5 5 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Habituation and novelty detection are two fundamental and widely studied neurocognitive processes. Whilst neural responses to repetitive and novel sensory input have been well-documented across a range of neuroimaging modalities, it is not yet fully understood how well these different modalities are able to describe consistent neural response patterns. This is particularly true for infants and young children, as different assessment modalities might show differential sensitivity to underlying neural processes across age. Thus far, many neurodevelopmental studies are limited in either sample size, longitudinal scope or breadth of measures employed, impeding investigations of how well common developmental trends can be captured via different methods. This study assessed habituation and novelty detection in N = 204 infants using EEG and fNIRS measured in two separate paradigms, but within the same study visit, at 1, 5 and 18 months of age in an infant cohort in rural Gambia. EEG was acquired during an auditory oddball paradigm during which infants were presented with Frequent, Infrequent and Trial Unique sounds. In the fNIRS paradigm, infants were familiarised to a sentence of infant-directed speech, novelty detection was assessed via a change in speaker. Indices for habituation and novelty detection were extracted for both EEG and NIRS RESULTS: We found evidence for weak to medium positive correlations between responses on the fNIRS and the EEG paradigms for indices of both habituation and novelty detection at most age points. Habituation indices correlated across modalities at 1 month and 5 months but not 18 months of age, and novelty responses were significantly correlated at 5 months and 18 months, but not at 1 month. Infants who showed robust habituation responses also showed robust novelty responses across both assessment modalities. This study is the first to examine concurrent correlations across two neuroimaging modalities across several longitudinal age points. Examining habituation and novelty detection, we show that despite the use of two different testing modalities, stimuli and timescale, it is possible to extract common neural metrics across a wide age range in infants. We suggest that these positive correlations might be strongest at times of greatest developmental change.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37146782
pii: S1053-8119(23)00304-X
doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120153
pmc: PMC10199411
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

120153

Subventions

Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/S018425/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : 220225/Z/20/Z
Pays : United Kingdom

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest or competing interest.

Références

Infant Behav Dev. 2020 Feb;58:101389
pubmed: 31778859
Dev Sci. 2019 Sep;22(5):e12817
pubmed: 30771264
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 20;10(10):e0140160
pubmed: 26485434
Front Psychol. 2013 Sep 05;4:595
pubmed: 24046757
Neuroimage. 2020 Apr 15;210:116540
pubmed: 31945509
Gates Open Res. 2019 Aug 27;3:1113
pubmed: 31508580
Phys Med Biol. 1988 Dec;33(12):1433-42
pubmed: 3237772
Neuroimage. 2019 Nov 15;202:116110
pubmed: 31449973
Brain Lang. 2016 Nov;162:46-59
pubmed: 27567401
Neurophotonics. 2014 Oct;1(2):025005
pubmed: 26157978
Phys Med Biol. 2006 Mar 7;51(5):N91-8
pubmed: 16481677
Brain Topogr. 2015 Sep;28(5):710-725
pubmed: 25589030
Dev Sci. 2019 Sep;22(5):e12822
pubmed: 30803122
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2011 Jan;1(1):22-46
pubmed: 22436417
Sci Rep. 2014 Apr 22;4:4740
pubmed: 24751935
Cereb Cortex. 2009 Feb;19(2):455-63
pubmed: 18544555
Neurobiol Learn Mem. 1996 Jul;66(1):67-79
pubmed: 8661252
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1982 Jun;79(11):3646-50
pubmed: 6808513
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2020 Jun;43:100784
pubmed: 32510350
Biol Psychol. 2013 Feb;92(2):315-22
pubmed: 23046905
Science. 1991 Nov 29;254(5036):1377-9
pubmed: 1962197
Cortex. 2016 Jul;80:61-75
pubmed: 27161033
Brain Res Bull. 2006 Oct 16;70(4-6):289-95
pubmed: 17027764
Comput Brain Behav. 2020 Jun;3(2):208-227
pubmed: 32856013
J Neurosci. 2009 Nov 25;29(47):14726-33
pubmed: 19940167
Children (Basel). 2022 Jul 01;9(7):
pubmed: 35883972
Exp Brain Res. 1987;65(3):614-22
pubmed: 3556488
Photonics. 2019 Aug 02;6(3):89
pubmed: 33490142
Phys Med Biol. 1995 Feb;40(2):295-304
pubmed: 7708855
Science. 1970 Mar 27;167(3926):1745-8
pubmed: 5416543
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2010 Mar;34(3):269-84
pubmed: 19632270
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Apr 1;46(2):e13
pubmed: 26559544
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
pubmed: 9176953
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Jun;25:198-208
pubmed: 28351534
Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2017 Jun;25:185-197
pubmed: 27692617
Neuron. 1998 Feb;20(2):285-96
pubmed: 9491989
Int J Psychophysiol. 2015 Jul;97(1):75-83
pubmed: 25896714
J Neurosci Methods. 2007 Aug 15;164(1):177-90
pubmed: 17517438
Neuroimage Clin. 2014 Jul 06;5:256-65
pubmed: 25161892
Neuroimage Clin. 2017 May 13;15:359-366
pubmed: 28580292
Dev Sci. 2016 May;19(3):488-503
pubmed: 26190466
Eur J Neurosci. 2007 Jul;26(1):265-74
pubmed: 17573923
Neuroimage. 2020 Apr 15;210:116591
pubmed: 32007497
Dev Sci. 2019 Sep;22(5):e12808
pubmed: 30739382
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
pubmed: 9176952
PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27497
pubmed: 22087327

Auteurs

Laura Katus (L)

Institute for Lifecourse Development, School of Human Sciences, University of Greenwich, London, United Kingdom; Centre for Family Research, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom. Electronic address: l.katus@greenwich.ac.uk.

Anna Blasi (A)

Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom.

Sam McCann (S)

Department of Women and Children's Health, Kings College London, United Kingdom.

Luke Mason (L)

Forensic and Neurodevelopmental Sciences, King's College London, United Kingdom.

Ebrima Mbye (E)

MRC Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, The Gambia.

Ebou Touray (E)

MRC Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, The Gambia.

Muhammed Ceesay (M)

MRC Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, The Gambia.

Michelle de Haan (M)

Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, United Kingdom; Great Ormond Street Hospital for Children NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom.

Sophie E Moore (SE)

Department of Women and Children's Health, Kings College London, United Kingdom; MRC Unit The Gambia at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, The Gambia.

Clare E Elwell (CE)

Department of Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom.

Sarah Lloyd-Fox (S)

Department of Psychology, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom.
The BRIGHT Study team are (in alphabetical order): Lena Acolatse, Chiara Bulgarelli, Maria-Magdalena Crespo Llado, Momodou K. Darboe, Saikou Drammeh, Tijan Fadera, Giulia Ghillia, Buba Jobarteh, Marta Perapoch Amado, Andrew M. Prentice, Maria Rozhko, Mariama Saidykhan.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH