Literature DB >> 9345513

Detecting activations in PET and fMRI: levels of inference and power.

K J Friston1, A Holmes, J B Poline, C J Price, C D Frith.   

Abstract

This paper is about detecting activations in statistical parametric maps and considers the relative sensitivity of a nested hierarchy of tests that we have framed in terms of the level of inference (voxel level, cluster level, and set level). These tests are based on the probability of obtaining c, or more, clusters with k, or more, voxels, above a threshold u. This probability has a reasonably simple form and is derived using distributional approximations from the theory of Gaussian fields. The most important contribution of this work is the notion of set-level inference. Set-level inference refers to the statistical inference that the number of clusters comprising an observed activation profile is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance. This inference pertains to the set of activations reaching criteria and represents a new way of assigning P values to distributed effects. Cluster-level inferences are a special case of set-level inferences, which obtain when the number of clusters c = 1. Similarly voxel-level inferences are special cases of cluster-level inferences that result when the cluster can be very small (i.e., k = 0). Using a theoretical power analysis of distributed activations, we observed that set-level inferences are generally more powerful than cluster-level inferences and that cluster-level inferences are generally more powerful than voxel-level inferences. The price paid for this increased sensitivity is reduced localizing power: Voxel-level tests permit individual voxels to be identified as significant, whereas cluster-and set-level inferences only allow clusters or sets of clusters to be so identified. For all levels of inference the spatial size of the underlying signal f (relative to resolution) determines the most powerful thresholds to adopt. For set-level inferences if f is large (e.g., fMRI) then the optimum extent threshold should be greater than the expected number of voxels for each cluster. If f is small (e.g., PET) the extent threshold should be small. We envisage that set-level inferences will find a role in making statistical inferences about distributed activations, particularly in fMRI.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 9345513     DOI: 10.1006/nimg.1996.0074

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


  311 in total

1.  Learning-related effects and functional neuroimaging.

Authors:  K M Petersson; C Elfgren; M Ingvar
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

Review 2.  Statistical limitations in functional neuroimaging. II. Signal detection and statistical inference.

Authors:  K M Petersson; T E Nichols; J B Poline; A P Holmes
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1999-07-29       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 3.  Statistical limitations in functional neuroimaging. I. Non-inferential methods and statistical models.

Authors:  K M Petersson; T E Nichols; J B Poline; A P Holmes
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  1999-07-29       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Human brain areas involved in the analysis of auditory movement.

Authors:  T D Griffiths; G G Green; A Rees; G Rees
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 5.038

5.  Analysis of brain activation patterns using a 3-D scale-space primal sketch.

Authors:  T Lindeberg; P Lidberg; P E Roland
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 5.038

6.  A method for making group inferences from functional MRI data using independent component analysis.

Authors:  V D Calhoun; T Adali; G D Pearlson; J J Pekar
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 5.038

7.  A 4D approach to the analysis of functional brain images: application to FMRI data.

Authors:  A Ledberg; P Fransson; J Larsson; K M Petersson
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2001-08       Impact factor: 5.038

8.  Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: a primer with examples.

Authors:  Thomas E Nichols; Andrew P Holmes
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 5.038

9.  Statistical flattening of MEG beamformer images.

Authors:  Gareth R Barnes; Arjan Hillebrand
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 5.038

10.  Statistical Parametric Mapping reveals ligand and region-specific activation of G-proteins by CB1 receptors and non-CB1 sites in the 3D reconstructed mouse brain.

Authors:  P T Nguyen; D E Selley; L J Sim-Selley
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2010-05-06       Impact factor: 6.556

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.