Literature DB >> 23376789

Linear mixed-effects modeling approach to FMRI group analysis.

Gang Chen1, Ziad S Saad, Jennifer C Britton, Daniel S Pine, Robert W Cox.   

Abstract

Conventional group analysis is usually performed with Student-type t-test, regression, or standard AN(C)OVA in which the variance-covariance matrix is presumed to have a simple structure. Some correction approaches are adopted when assumptions about the covariance structure is violated. However, as experiments are designed with different degrees of sophistication, these traditional methods can become cumbersome, or even be unable to handle the situation at hand. For example, most current FMRI software packages have difficulty analyzing the following scenarios at group level: (1) taking within-subject variability into account when there are effect estimates from multiple runs or sessions; (2) continuous explanatory variables (covariates) modeling in the presence of a within-subject (repeated measures) factor, multiple subject-grouping (between-subjects) factors, or the mixture of both; (3) subject-specific adjustments in covariate modeling; (4) group analysis with estimation of hemodynamic response (HDR) function by multiple basis functions; (5) various cases of missing data in longitudinal studies; and (6) group studies involving family members or twins. Here we present a linear mixed-effects modeling (LME) methodology that extends the conventional group analysis approach to analyze many complicated cases, including the six prototypes delineated above, whose analyses would be otherwise either difficult or unfeasible under traditional frameworks such as AN(C)OVA and general linear model (GLM). In addition, the strength of the LME framework lies in its flexibility to model and estimate the variance-covariance structures for both random effects and residuals. The intraclass correlation (ICC) values can be easily obtained with an LME model with crossed random effects, even at the presence of confounding fixed effects. The simulations of one prototypical scenario indicate that the LME modeling keeps a balance between the control for false positives and the sensitivity for activation detection. The importance of hypothesis formulation is also illustrated in the simulations. Comparisons with alternative group analysis approaches and the limitations of LME are discussed in details. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23376789      PMCID: PMC3638840          DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.01.047

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


  31 in total

1.  Valid conjunction inference with the minimum statistic.

Authors:  Thomas Nichols; Matthew Brett; Jesper Andersson; Tor Wager; Jean-Baptiste Poline
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2005-04-15       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  A unified mixed-model method for association mapping that accounts for multiple levels of relatedness.

Authors:  Jianming Yu; Gael Pressoir; William H Briggs; Irie Vroh Bi; Masanori Yamasaki; John F Doebley; Michael D McMullen; Brandon S Gaut; Dahlia M Nielsen; James B Holland; Stephen Kresovich; Edward S Buckler
Journal:  Nat Genet       Date:  2005-12-25       Impact factor: 38.330

3.  The neural bases of momentary lapses in attention.

Authors:  D H Weissman; K C Roberts; K M Visscher; M G Woldorff
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2006-06-11       Impact factor: 24.884

4.  Functional imaging analysis contest (FIAC) analysis according to AFNI and SUMA.

Authors:  Ziad S Saad; Gang Chen; Richard C Reynolds; Patricia P Christidis; Kenneth R Hammett; Patrick S F Bellgowan; Robert W Cox
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Circuitry underlying temporally extended spatial working memory.

Authors:  Charles F Geier; Krista E Garver; Beatriz Luna
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2006-12-29       Impact factor: 6.556

6.  Hypothesis tests for population heterogeneity in meta-analysis.

Authors:  Wolfgang Viechtbauer
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.380

Review 7.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.

Authors:  P E Shrout; J L Fleiss
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 17.737

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

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

9.  The variability of human, BOLD hemodynamic responses.

Authors:  G K Aguirre; E Zarahn; M D'esposito
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 6.556

10.  Small sample inference for fixed effects from restricted maximum likelihood.

Authors:  M G Kenward; J H Roger
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1997-09       Impact factor: 2.571

View more
  142 in total

1.  Open Environment for Multimodal Interactive Connectivity Visualization and Analysis.

Authors:  Paul A Taylor; Gang Chen; Robert W Cox; Ziad S Saad
Journal:  Brain Connect       Date:  2015-11-10

2.  Brain regulation of appetite in twins.

Authors:  Susan J Melhorn; Sonya Mehta; Mario Kratz; Vidhi Tyagi; Mary F Webb; Carolyn J Noonan; Dedra S Buchwald; Jack Goldberg; Kenneth R Maravilla; Thomas J Grabowski; Ellen A Schur
Journal:  Am J Clin Nutr       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 7.045

3.  Longitudinal assessment of white matter abnormalities following sports-related concussion.

Authors:  Timothy B Meier; Maurizio Bergamino; Patrick S F Bellgowan; T K Teague; Josef M Ling; Andreas Jeromin; Andrew R Mayer
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2015-12-10       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Complementary Features of Attention Bias Modification Therapy and Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy in Pediatric Anxiety Disorders.

Authors:  Lauren K White; Stefanie Sequeira; Jennifer C Britton; Melissa A Brotman; Andrea L Gold; Erin Berman; Kenneth Towbin; Rany Abend; Nathan A Fox; Yair Bar-Haim; Ellen Leibenluft; Daniel S Pine
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2017-04-14       Impact factor: 18.112

5.  Intraclass correlation: Improved modeling approaches and applications for neuroimaging.

Authors:  Gang Chen; Paul A Taylor; Simone P Haller; Katharina Kircanski; Joel Stoddard; Daniel S Pine; Ellen Leibenluft; Melissa A Brotman; Robert W Cox
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2017-12-07       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  Handling Multiplicity in Neuroimaging Through Bayesian Lenses with Multilevel Modeling.

Authors:  Gang Chen; Yaqiong Xiao; Paul A Taylor; Justin K Rajendra; Tracy Riggins; Fengji Geng; Elizabeth Redcay; Robert W Cox
Journal:  Neuroinformatics       Date:  2019-10

7.  Does experience in talking facilitate speech repetition?

Authors:  Linda I Shuster; Donna R Moore; Gang Chen; Dennis M Ruscello; William F Wonderlin
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-11-09       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Untangling the relatedness among correlations, Part II: Inter-subject correlation group analysis through linear mixed-effects modeling.

Authors:  Gang Chen; Paul A Taylor; Yong-Wook Shin; Richard C Reynolds; Robert W Cox
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2016-10-15       Impact factor: 6.556

9.  Spatial Mechanisms within the Dorsal Visual Pathway Contribute to the Configural Processing of Faces.

Authors:  Valentinos Zachariou; Christine V Nikas; Zaid N Safiullah; Stephen J Gotts; Leslie G Ungerleider
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 5.357

10.  Impact of induced anxiety on neural responses to monetary incentives.

Authors:  Adam X Gorka; Bari Fuchs; Christian Grillon; Monique Ernst
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2018-11-08       Impact factor: 3.436

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.