Quantitative EEG and Precision fMRI: The Future of Psychometric Testing in Clinical Evaluation

                     References: 

Gratton, C., et al. (2019). Defining individual-specific functional neuroanatomy for

precision psychiatry. Biological Psychiatry, 88(1), 28-39. doi:10.1016/j.biopsych.2019.10.026

McVoy, M., Lytle, S., Fulchiero, E., Aebi, M. E., Adeleye, O., & Sajatovic, M. (2019). A

systematic review of quantitative EEG as a possible biomarker in child psychiatric disorders. Psychiatryresearch, 279 331- 344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.07.004                 

                    Traditionally used as pivotal research techniques to further quantify the human brain, fMRI and EEG are invaluable to the fields of Psychology and Neuroscience. While both fMRI and EEG have strong roots within research, both research methods have their pros and cons. While fMRI has great spatial resolution, it lacks temporal resolution, with EEG having great temporal but poor spatial. Thus, research has relied on data collected from fMRI and EEG to work in concert to explore the concurrent hypotheses. In addition to the usefulness of fMRI and EEG in research, both psychometric tools are useful in clinical psychiatry and diagnosis. But with the aforementioned limitations in both methods, both fMRI and EEG remain constricted psychometric tests along with cost, inaccessibility, and immobility requirements during the test. However, recent breakthroughs in fMRI and EEG technology research has led to new, refined research methods that can be implemented in psychiatric diagnosis. Such refinements reveal the evolving and self-seeking prowess within Neuroscientists and Neuropathological researchers to yield more accurate diagnoses for psychiatric patients. In this blog, both precision fMRI (pfMRI) and qualitative EEG (qEEG) will be explored as pivotal and refined approaches in the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders.

                        In "Defining individual-specific functional neuroanatomy for precision psychiatry," Gratton et al. (2019) advocate for the use of precision fMRI due to the increased validity and individualization this research technique may provide in psychiatric testing. Precision fMRI confronts challenges typically seen in fMRI data collection by 1.) further understanding the normal versus pathological brain by individual scan studies, 2.) providing tools for accurate diagnosis and prognosis at the individual level, 3.) a subject-specific targeting of the specific pathology, and 4.) treatment tracking for efficiency and remission. In this present study, there is strong supportive evidence of the pfMRI model of collecting "larger quantities of fMRI data in single individuals as opposed to smaller quantities of data averaged over groups" (Gratton et al. 2019). Such a strategy emphasizes the connection between individual differences and differences in brain functions. Ultimately, the refined pfMRI benefits psychiatry diagnoses through increasing validity and data specification. Whereas the fMRI scan would be compared to a normal scan to determine pathology, the pfMRI scan relies on the individual changes that lead to the production of such pathology. Through this new approach, further individualization can be applied to psychiatric diagnoses to be accurately applied to each unique patient.

                      In "A systematic review of quantitative EEG as a possible biomarker in child psychiatric disorders," McVoy et al. (2019) demonstrate the usefulness of quantitative EEG in psychiatric diagnoses, particularly in children. While an EEG records raw data, the electrical activity encoded from the brain in real-time, the qEEG has statistical and mathematical formulas directly integrated and recording in the data collection process. Such a device is useful in comparing direct changes in latency in specific alpha, beta, theta, or delta bands. Researchers McVoy et al. (2019) review such qEEG biomarker patterns in children and their evidence reveal qEEG-specific patterns in psychiatric disorders. By compiling and comparing the biomarkers, psychiatric diagnoses can be narrowed, aiding diagnosticians and researchers alike. 

            To conclude, the fields of Neuroscience and Psychology are ever-expanding, and research conducted not only better serves the understanding of the complexities of the mind but promotes an important clinical application. By researching and modifying current tools available to researchers and diagnosticians, a further level of refinement and validity can be obtained and applied. Not only yielding more effective evidence and understanding of the brain but also being more accurate in the diagnoses of psychiatric patients. The Gratton et al. (2019) and McVoy et al. (2019) studies reflect the overall goal of this trend: utilize the research and apply it to psychiatric diagnoses, improving the validity and access to accurate diagnoses. Even though neither pfMRI and qEEG are perfect psychometric devices, this attention to refining our research collecting tools moves us to a future of cost-effective testing for our patients and higher confidence in psychiatric diagnosing and treatment.