Literature DB >> 20817103

Network modelling methods for FMRI.

Stephen M Smith1, Karla L Miller, Gholamreza Salimi-Khorshidi, Matthew Webster, Christian F Beckmann, Thomas E Nichols, Joseph D Ramsey, Mark W Woolrich.   

Abstract

There is great interest in estimating brain "networks" from FMRI data. This is often attempted by identifying a set of functional "nodes" (e.g., spatial ROIs or ICA maps) and then conducting a connectivity analysis between the nodes, based on the FMRI timeseries associated with the nodes. Analysis methods range from very simple measures that consider just two nodes at a time (e.g., correlation between two nodes' timeseries) to sophisticated approaches that consider all nodes simultaneously and estimate one global network model (e.g., Bayes net models). Many different methods are being used in the literature, but almost none has been carefully validated or compared for use on FMRI timeseries data. In this work we generate rich, realistic simulated FMRI data for a wide range of underlying networks, experimental protocols and problematic confounds in the data, in order to compare different connectivity estimation approaches. Our results show that in general correlation-based approaches can be quite successful, methods based on higher-order statistics are less sensitive, and lag-based approaches perform very poorly. More specifically: there are several methods that can give high sensitivity to network connection detection on good quality FMRI data, in particular, partial correlation, regularised inverse covariance estimation and several Bayes net methods; however, accurate estimation of connection directionality is more difficult to achieve, though Patel's τ can be reasonably successful. With respect to the various confounds added to the data, the most striking result was that the use of functionally inaccurate ROIs (when defining the network nodes and extracting their associated timeseries) is extremely damaging to network estimation; hence, results derived from inappropriate ROI definition (such as via structural atlases) should be regarded with great caution.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20817103     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.063

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


  671 in total

Review 1.  Bayesian networks in neuroscience: a survey.

Authors:  Concha Bielza; Pedro Larrañaga
Journal:  Front Comput Neurosci       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 2.380

2.  Differences in resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging functional network connectivity between schizophrenia and psychotic bipolar probands and their unaffected first-degree relatives.

Authors:  Shashwath A Meda; Adrienne Gill; Michael C Stevens; Raymond P Lorenzoni; David C Glahn; Vince D Calhoun; John A Sweeney; Carol A Tamminga; Matcheri S Keshavan; Gunvant Thaker; Godfrey D Pearlson
Journal:  Biol Psychiatry       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 13.382

Review 3.  Development of the brain's functional network architecture.

Authors:  Alecia C Vogel; Jonathan D Power; Steven E Petersen; Bradley L Schlaggar
Journal:  Neuropsychol Rev       Date:  2010-10-27       Impact factor: 7.444

4.  Causal interactions in attention networks predict behavioral performance.

Authors:  Xiaotong Wen; Li Yao; Yijun Liu; Mingzhou Ding
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-01-25       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 5.  The economy of brain network organization.

Authors:  Ed Bullmore; Olaf Sporns
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2012-04-13       Impact factor: 34.870

6.  Interactive brains, social minds.

Authors:  Johanna Sänger; Ulman Lindenberger; Viktor Müller
Journal:  Commun Integr Biol       Date:  2011-11-01

7.  A procedure to increase the power of Granger-causal analysis through temporal smoothing.

Authors:  E Spencer; L-E Martinet; E N Eskandar; C J Chu; E D Kolaczyk; S S Cash; U T Eden; M A Kramer
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 2.390

8.  Effective connectivity within human primary visual cortex predicts interindividual diversity in illusory perception.

Authors:  Chen Song; D Samuel Schwarzkopf; Antoine Lutti; Baojuan Li; Ryota Kanai; Geraint Rees
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 6.167

9.  Improved estimation of subject-level functional connectivity using full and partial correlation with empirical Bayes shrinkage.

Authors:  Amanda F Mejia; Mary Beth Nebel; Anita D Barber; Ann S Choe; James J Pekar; Brian S Caffo; Martin A Lindquist
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2018-02-14       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Evidence for working memory storage operations in perceptual cortex.

Authors:  Kartik K Sreenivasan; Caterina Gratton; Jason Vytlacil; Mark D'Esposito
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 3.282

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.