Literature DB >> 23754543

Number of events and reliability in fMRI.

Benjamin O Turner1, Michael B Miller.   

Abstract

Relatively early in the history of fMRI, research focused on issues of power and reliability, with an important line concerning the establishment of optimal procedures for experimental design in order to maximize the various statistical properties of such designs. However, in recent years, tasks wherein events are defined only a posteriori, on the basis of behavior, have become increasingly common. Although these designs enable a much wider array of questions to be answered, they are not amenable to the tight control afforded by designs with events defined entirely a priori, and little work has assessed issues of power and reliability in such designs. We demonstrate how differences in numbers of events-as can occur with a posteriori event definition-affect reliability, both through simulation and in real data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23754543     DOI: 10.3758/s13415-013-0178-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci        ISSN: 1530-7026            Impact factor:   3.526


  25 in total

1.  Detection power, estimation efficiency, and predictability in event-related fMRI.

Authors:  T T Liu; L R Frank; E C Wong; R B Buxton
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2001-04       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Variability in fMRI: an examination of intersession differences.

Authors:  D J McGonigle; A M Howseman; B S Athwal; K J Friston; R S Frackowiak; A P Holmes
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 6.556

3.  Extensive individual differences in brain activations associated with episodic retrieval are reliable over time.

Authors:  Michael B Miller; John Darrell Van Horn; George L Wolford; Todd C Handy; Monica Valsangkar-Smyth; Souheil Inati; Scott Grafton; Michael S Gazzaniga
Journal:  J Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2002-11-15       Impact factor: 3.225

4.  Estimating sample size in functional MRI (fMRI) neuroimaging studies: statistical power analyses.

Authors:  John E Desmond; Gary H Glover
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2002-08-30       Impact factor: 2.390

5.  Does parametric fMRI analysis with SPM yield valid results? An empirical study of 1484 rest datasets.

Authors:  Anders Eklund; Mats Andersson; Camilla Josephson; Magnus Johannesson; Hans Knutsson
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-04-10       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 6.  How reliable are the results from functional magnetic resonance imaging?

Authors:  Craig M Bennett; Michael B Miller
Journal:  Ann N Y Acad Sci       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 5.691

7.  Power calculation for group fMRI studies accounting for arbitrary design and temporal autocorrelation.

Authors:  Jeanette A Mumford; Thomas E Nichols
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2007-08-19       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 8.  The secret lives of experiments: methods reporting in the fMRI literature.

Authors:  Joshua Carp
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2012-07-10       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 9.  Power failure: why small sample size undermines the reliability of neuroscience.

Authors:  Katherine S Button; John P A Ioannidis; Claire Mokrysz; Brian A Nosek; Jonathan Flint; Emma S J Robinson; Marcus R Munafò
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurosci       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 34.870

10.  Optimization of experimental design in fMRI: a general framework using a genetic algorithm.

Authors:  Tor D Wager; Thomas E Nichols
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 6.556

View more
  5 in total

1.  Minimizing noise in pediatric task-based functional MRI; Adolescents with developmental disabilities and typical development.

Authors:  Catherine Fassbender; Prerona Mukherjee; Julie B Schweitzer
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2017-01-24       Impact factor: 6.556

Review 2.  Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Cognitive Control following Traumatic Brain Injury.

Authors:  Randall S Scheibel
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2017-08-04       Impact factor: 4.003

3.  What Has Replication Ever Done for Us? Insights from Neuroimaging of Speech Perception.

Authors:  Samuel Evans
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 3.169

4.  Small sample sizes reduce the replicability of task-based fMRI studies.

Authors:  Benjamin O Turner; Erick J Paul; Michael B Miller; Aron K Barbey
Journal:  Commun Biol       Date:  2018-06-07

5.  Neurocognitive Development of the Resolution of Selective Visuo-Spatial Attention: Functional MRI Evidence From Object Tracking.

Authors:  Kerstin Wolf; Elena Galeano Weber; Jasper J F van den Bosch; Steffen Volz; Ulrike Nöth; Ralf Deichmann; Marcus J Naumer; Till Pfeiffer; Christian J Fiebach
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-07-30
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.