Literature DB >> 18482849

Evaluation and comparison of GLM- and CVA-based fMRI processing pipelines with Java-based fMRI processing pipeline evaluation system.

Jing Zhang1, Lichen Liang, Jon R Anderson, Lael Gatewood, David A Rottenberg, Stephen C Strother.   

Abstract

Activation patterns identified by fMRI processing pipelines or fMRI software packages are usually determined by the preprocessing options, parameters, and statistical models used. Previous studies that evaluated options of GLM (general linear model)--based fMRI processing pipelines are mainly based on simulated data with receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis, but evaluation of such fMRI processing pipelines on real fMRI data is rare. To understand the effect of processing options on performance of GLM-based fMRI processing pipelines with real fMRI data, we investigated the impact of commonly-used fMRI preprocessing steps; optimized the associated GLM-based single-subject processing pipelines; and quantitatively compared univariate GLM (in FSL.FEAT and NPAIRS.GLM) and multivariate CVA (canonical variates analysis) (in NPAIRS.CVA)-based analytic models in single-subject analysis with a recently developed fMRI processing pipeline evaluation system based on prediction accuracy (classification accuracy) and reproducibility performance metrics. For block-design data, we found that with GLM analysis (1) slice timing correction and global intensity normalization have little consistent impact on fMRI processing pipelines, spatial smoothing and high-pass filtering or temporal detrending significantly increases pipeline performance and thus are essential for robust fMRI statistical analysis; (2) combined optimization of spatial smoothing and temporal detrending improves pipeline performance; and (3) in general, the prediction performance of multivariate CVA is higher than that of the univariate GLM, while univariate GLM is more reproducible than multivariate CVA. Because of the different bias-variance trade-offs of univariate and multivariate models, it may be necessary to consider a consensus approach to obtain more accurate activation patterns in fMRI data.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18482849      PMCID: PMC4277234          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.03.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neuroimage        ISSN: 1053-8119            Impact factor:   6.556


  59 in total

1.  Event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging in Parkinson's disease before and after levodopa.

Authors:  B Haslinger; P Erhard; N Kämpfe; H Boecker; E Rummeny; M Schwaiger; B Conrad; A O Ceballos-Baumann
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 13.501

2.  Blind source separation of multiple signal sources of fMRI data sets using independent component analysis.

Authors:  B B Biswal; J L Ulmer
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1999 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.826

3.  Penalized discriminant analysis of [15O]-water PET brain images with prediction error selection of smoothness and regularization hyperparameters.

Authors:  R Kustra; S Strother
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 10.048

4.  Activation pattern reproducibility: measuring the effects of group size and data analysis models.

Authors:  S C Strother; N Lange; J R Anderson; K A Schaper; K Rehm; L K Hansen; D A Rottenberg
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Support vector machines for temporal classification of block design fMRI data.

Authors:  Stephen LaConte; Stephen Strother; Vladimir Cherkassky; Jon Anderson; Xiaoping Hu
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2005-03-24       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 6.  Functional brain mapping and its applications to neurosurgery.

Authors:  Suzanne Tharin; Alexandra Golby
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 4.654

7.  AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages.

Authors:  R W Cox
Journal:  Comput Biomed Res       Date:  1996-06

8.  Analysis of fMRI data by blind separation into independent spatial components.

Authors:  M J McKeown; S Makeig; G G Brown; T P Jung; S S Kindermann; A J Bell; T J Sejnowski
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1998       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Automated image registration: II. Intersubject validation of linear and nonlinear models.

Authors:  R P Woods; S T Grafton; J D Watson; N L Sicotte; J C Mazziotta
Journal:  J Comput Assist Tomogr       Date:  1998 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.826

10.  Localizing and lateralizing language in patients with brain tumors: feasibility of routine preoperative functional MR imaging in 81 consecutive patients.

Authors:  Christoph Stippich; Nora Rapps; Jens Dreyhaupt; Anita Durst; Bodo Kress; Ernst Nennig; Volker M Tronnier; Klaus Sartor
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 11.105

View more
  5 in total

1.  A mutual information-based metric for evaluation of fMRI data-processing approaches.

Authors:  Babak Afshin-Pour; Hamid Soltanian-Zadeh; Gholam-Ali Hossein-Zadeh; Cheryl L Grady; Stephen C Strother
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Machine Learning in Medical Imaging.

Authors:  Miles N Wernick; Yongyi Yang; Jovan G Brankov; Grigori Yourganov; Stephen C Strother
Journal:  IEEE Signal Process Mag       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 12.551

3.  A reproducible evaluation of ANTs similarity metric performance in brain image registration.

Authors:  Brian B Avants; Nicholas J Tustison; Gang Song; Philip A Cook; Arno Klein; James C Gee
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-09-17       Impact factor: 6.556

4.  Object recognition in clutter: cortical responses depend on the type of learning.

Authors:  Jay Hegdé; Serena K Thompson; Mark Brady; Daniel Kersten
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2012-06-19       Impact factor: 3.169

5.  Exploiting Complexity Information for Brain Activation Detection.

Authors:  Yan Zhang; Jiali Liang; Qiang Lin; Zhenghui Hu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.