Technological and methodological innovations are equipping researchers with unprecedented capabilities for detecting and characterizing pathologic processes in the developing human brain. As a result, ambitions to achieve clinically useful tools to assist in the diagnosis and management of mental health and learning disorders are gaining momentum. To this end, it is critical to accrue large-scale multimodal datasets that capture a broad range of commonly encountered clinical psychopathology. The Child Mind Institute has launched the Healthy Brain Network (HBN), an ongoing initiative focused on creating and sharing a biobank of data from 10,000 New York area participants (ages 5–21). The HBN Biobank houses data about psychiatric, behavioral, cognitive, and lifestyle phenotypes, as well as multimodal brain imaging (resting and naturalistic viewing fMRI, diffusion MRI, morphometric MRI), electroencephalography, eye-tracking, voice and video recordings, genetics and actigraphy. Here, we present the rationale, design and implementation of HBN protocols. We describe the first data release (n=664) and the potential of the biobank to advance related areas (e.g., biophysical modeling, voice analysis).

Technological and methodological innovations are equipping researchers with unprecedented capabilities for detecting and characterizing pathologic processes in the developing human brain. As a result, ambitions to achieve clinically useful tools to assist in the diagnosis and management of mental health and learning disorders are gaining momentum. To this end, it is critical to accrue large-scale multimodal datasets that capture a broad range of commonly encountered clinical psychopathology. The Child Mind Institute has launched the Healthy Brain Network (HBN), an ongoing initiative focused on creating and sharing a biobank of data from 10,000 New York area participants (ages 5-21). The HBN Biobank houses data about psychiatric, behavioral, cognitive, and lifestyle phenotypes, as well as multimodal brain imaging (resting and naturalistic viewing fMRI, diffusion MRI, morphometric MRI), electroencephalography, eye-tracking, voice and video recordings, genetics, and actigraphy. Here, we present the rationale, design and implementation of HBN protocols. We describe the first data release (n = 664) and the potential of the biobank to advance related areas (e.g., biophysical modeling, voice analysis).. CC-BY-ND 4.0 International license peer-reviewed) is the author/funder. It is made available under aThe copyright holder for this preprint (which was not . http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/149369 doi: bioRxiv preprint first posted online Jun. 13, 2017; PURPOSE OF DATA COLLECTIONPsychiatric and learning disorders are among the most common and debilitating illnesses across the lifespan. Epidemiologic studies indicate that 75% of all diagnosable psychiatric disorders begin prior to age 241 . This underscores the need for increased focus on studies of the developing brain 2 . Beyond improving our understanding of the pathophysiology that underlies the emergence of psychiatric illness throughout development, such research has the potential to identify clinically useful markers of illness that can improve the early detection of pathology and guide interventions. Although the use of neuroimaging, neuropsychology, neurophysiology and genetics has made significant strides in revealing biological correlates for a broad array of illnesses, findings have been lacking in specificity 3 . Consequently, progress in finding clinically useful brain-based biomarkers has been disappointing 4,5 .Given the slow pace in biomarker identification, investigators have been prompted to rethink research paradigms and practices. Most notably, the emphasis on mapping diagnostic labels from a clinically defined nosology (e.g., the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or the International Classification of Diseases) to varying biological indices has proven to be problematic, as it assumes consistent biological relationships with broad constellations of signs and symptoms 6,7 . Epidemiologists, psychopathologists, geneticists and neuroscientists are reconsidering the relevance of diagnostic boundaries due to the lack of specif...

Data sharing is increasingly recommended as a means of accelerating science by facilitating collaboration, transparency, and reproducibility. While few oppose data sharing philosophically, a range of barriers deter most researchers from implementing it in practice. To justify the significant effort required for sharing data, funding agencies, institutions, and investigators need clear evidence of benefit. Here, using the International Neuroimaging Data-sharing Initiative, we present a case study that provides direct evidence of the impact of open sharing on brain imaging data use and resulting peer-reviewed publications. We demonstrate that openly shared data can increase the scale of scientific studies conducted by data contributors, and can recruit scientists from a broader range of disciplines. These findings dispel the myth that scientific findings using shared data cannot be published in high-impact journals, suggest the transformative power of data sharing for accelerating science, and underscore the need for implementing data sharing universally.

Background: Problematic internet use (PIU) is an increasingly worrisome issue, as youth population studies are establishing links with internalizing and externalizing problems. There is a need for a better understanding of psychiatric diagnostic profiles associated with this issue, as well as its unique contributions to impairment. Here, we leveraged the ongoing, large-scale Child Mind Institute Healthy Brain Network, a transdiagnostic self-referred, community sample of children and adolescents (ages 5-21), to examine the associations between PIU and psychopathology, general impairment, physical health and sleep disturbances. Methods: A total sample of 564 (190 female) participants between the ages of 7-15 (mean = 10.80, SD = 2.16), along with their parents/guardians, completed diagnostic interviews with clinicians, answered a wide range of selfreport (SR) and parent-report (PR) questionnaires, including the Internet Addiction Test (IAT) and underwent physical testing as part of the Healthy Brain Network protocol.

When fields lack consensus standards and ground truths for their analytic methods, reproducibility tends to be more of an ideal than a reality. Such has been the case for functional neuroimaging, where there exists a sprawling space of tools from which scientists can construct processing pipelines and draw interpretations. We provide a critical evaluation of the impact of differences observed in results across five independently developed functional MRI minimal preprocessing pipelines. We show that even when handling the same exact data, inter-pipeline agreement was only moderate, with the specific steps that contribute to the lack of agreement varying across pipeline comparisons. Using a densely sampled test-retest dataset, we show that the limitations imposed by inter-pipeline agreement mainly become appreciable when the reliability of the underlying data is high. We highlight the importance of comparison among analytic tools and parameters, as both widely debated (e.g., global signal regression) and commonly overlooked (e.g., MNI template version) decisions were each found to lead to marked variation. We provide recommendations for incorporating tool-based variability in functional neuroimaging analyses and a supporting infrastructure.