Literature DB >> 27477536

How to avoid mismodelling in GLM-based fMRI data analysis: cross-validated Bayesian model selection.

Joram Soch1, John-Dylan Haynes2, Carsten Allefeld3.   

Abstract

Voxel-wise general linear models (GLMs) are a standard approach for analyzing functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. An advantage of GLMs is that they are flexible and can be adapted to the requirements of many different data sets. However, the specification of first-level GLMs leaves the researcher with many degrees of freedom which is problematic given recent efforts to ensure robust and reproducible fMRI data analysis. Formal model comparisons that allow a systematic assessment of GLMs are only rarely performed. On the one hand, too simple models may underfit data and leave real effects undiscovered. On the other hand, too complex models might overfit data and also reduce statistical power. Here we present a systematic approach termed cross-validated Bayesian model selection (cvBMS) that allows to decide which GLM best describes a given fMRI data set. Importantly, our approach allows for non-nested model comparison, i.e. comparing more than two models that do not just differ by adding one or more regressors. It also allows for spatially heterogeneous modelling, i.e. using different models for different parts of the brain. We validate our method using simulated data and demonstrate potential applications to empirical data. The increased use of model comparison and model selection should increase the reliability of GLM results and reproducibility of fMRI studies.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Bayesian model selection; cross-validation; fMRI-based neuroimaging; mass-univariate GLM; model misspecifcation; underfitting versus overfitting

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27477536     DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.07.047

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


  7 in total

1.  Alterations in the amplitude and burst rate of beta oscillations impair reward-dependent motor learning in anxiety.

Authors:  Sebastian Sporn; Thomas Hein; Maria Herrojo Ruiz
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-05-19       Impact factor: 8.140

2.  Differential Contributions of Ventral Striatum Subregions to the Motivational and Hedonic Components of the Affective Processing of Reward.

Authors:  Eva R Pool; David Munoz Tord; Sylvain Delplanque; Yoann Stussi; Donato Cereghetti; Patrik Vuilleumier; David Sander
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2022-02-11       Impact factor: 6.709

3.  Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Studies in Sexual Medicine: A Primer.

Authors:  Colleen Mills-Finnerty; Eleni Frangos; Kachina Allen; Barry Komisaruk; Nan Wise
Journal:  J Sex Med       Date:  2022-04-11       Impact factor: 3.937

4.  Altered predictive control during memory suppression in PTSD.

Authors:  Giovanni Leone; Charlotte Postel; Alison Mary; Florence Fraisse; Thomas Vallée; Fausto Viader; Vincent de La Sayette; Denis Peschanski; Jaques Dayan; Francis Eustache; Pierre Gagnepain
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2022-06-08       Impact factor: 17.694

5.  Radiomic features predict Ki-67 expression level and survival in lower grade gliomas.

Authors:  Yiming Li; Zenghui Qian; Kaibin Xu; Kai Wang; Xing Fan; Shaowu Li; Xing Liu; Yinyan Wang; Tao Jiang
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2017-09-12       Impact factor: 4.130

6.  A Neuro-computational Account of Arbitration between Choice Imitation and Goal Emulation during Human Observational Learning.

Authors:  Caroline J Charpentier; Kiyohito Iigaya; John P O'Doherty
Journal:  Neuron       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 17.173

7.  Systemic physiology augmented functional near-infrared spectroscopy: a powerful approach to study the embodied human brain.

Authors:  Felix Scholkmann; Ilias Tachtsidis; Martin Wolf; Ursula Wolf
Journal:  Neurophotonics       Date:  2022-07-11       Impact factor: 4.212

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.