SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

The BrainLat project, a multimodal neuroimaging dataset of neurodegeneration from underrepresented backgrounds.

Sci Data · 2023-12-09

DOI: 10.1038/s41597-023-02806-8PMID: 38071313

Open accessResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov't; Dataset; data-paper; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

The Latin American Brain Health Institute (BrainLat) has released a unique multimodal neuroimaging dataset of 780 participants from Latin American. The dataset includes 530 patients with neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's disease (AD), behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD), multiple sclerosis (MS), Parkinson's disease (PD), and 250 healthy controls (HCs). This dataset (62.7 ± 9.5 years, age range 21-89 years) was collected through a multicentric effort across five Latin American countries to address the need for affordable, scalable, and available biomarkers in regions with larger inequities. The BrainLat is the first regional collection of clinical and cognitive assessments, anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), resting-state functional MRI (fMRI), diffusion-weighted MRI (DWI), and high density resting-state electroencephalography (EEG) in dementia patients. In addition, it includes demographic information about harmonized recruitment and assessment protocols. The dataset is publicly available to encourage further research and development of tools and health applications for neurodegeneration based on multimodal neuroimaging, promoting the assessment of regional variability and inclusion of underrepresented participants in research.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.