Comparison of fMRI analysis methods for heterogeneous BOLD responses in block design studies

被引:15
|
作者
Liu, Jia [1 ]
Duffy, Ben A. [1 ]
Bernal-Casas, David [1 ]
Fang, Zhongnan [1 ,2 ]
Lee, Jin Hyung [1 ,2 ,3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Dept Neurol & Neurol Sci, 1201 Welch Rd,P206, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Elect Engn, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Stanford Univ, Dept Bioengn, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[4] Stanford Univ, Dept Neurosurg, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
Hemodynamic response; Block design; fMRI data analysis; Optogenetic fMRI; INDEPENDENT COMPONENT ANALYSIS; FUNCTIONAL MRI DATA; HEMODYNAMIC-RESPONSE; STATISTICAL-METHODS; BLIND SEPARATION; TIME-SERIES; BRAIN; MODEL; NEURONS; TRANSIENT;
D O I
10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.12.045
中图分类号
Q189 [神经科学];
学科分类号
071006 ;
摘要
A large number of fMRI studies have shown that the temporal dynamics of evoked BOLD responses can be highly heterogeneous. Failing to model heterogeneous responses in statistical analysis can lead to significant errors in signal detection and characterization and alter the neurobiological interpretation. However, to date it is not clear that, out of a large number of options, which methods are robust against variability in the temporal dynamics of BOLD responses in block-design studies. Here, we used rodent optogenetic fMRI data with heterogeneous BOLD responses and simulations guided by experimental data as a means to investigate different analysis methods' performance against heterogeneous BOLD responses. Evaluations are carried out within the general linear model (GLM) framework and consist of standard basis sets as well as independent component analysis (ICA). Analyses show that, in the presence of heterogeneous BOLD responses, conventionally used GLM with a canonical basis set leads to considerable errors in the detection and characterization of BOLD responses. Our results suggest that the 3rd and 4th order gamma basis sets, the 7th to 9th order finite impulse response (FIR) basis sets, the 5th to 9th order B-spline basis sets, and the 2nd to 5th order Fourier basis sets are optimal for good balance between detection and characterization, while the 1st order Fourier basis set (coherence analysis) used in our earlier studies show good detection capability. ICA has mostly good detection and characterization capabilities, but detects a large volume of spurious activation with the control fMRI data.
引用
收藏
页码:390 / 408
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Explicit coding in the brain: data-driven semantic analysis of human fMRI BOLD responses with Formal Concept Analysis
    Endres, D.
    Adam, R.
    Noppeney, U.
    Giese, M.
    PERCEPTION, 2012, 41 : 67 - 67
  • [22] A COMPARISON OF SEQUENTIAL DESIGN METHODS FOR RF CIRCUIT BLOCK MODELING
    Crombecq, Karel
    De Tornmasi, Luciano
    Gorissen, Dirk
    Dhaene, Tom
    2008 WINTER SIMULATION CONFERENCE, VOLS 1-5, 2008, : 2942 - 2942
  • [23] Comparison of BCG artifact removal methods for evoked responses in simultaneous EEG-fMRI
    Shams, Nasim
    Alain, Claude
    Strother, Stephen
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS, 2015, 245 : 137 - 146
  • [24] Comparison of Multi-Subject ICA Methods for Analysis of fMRI Data
    Erhardt, Erik Barry
    Rachakonda, Srinivas
    Bedrick, Edward J.
    Allen, Elena A.
    Adali, Tuelay
    Calhoun, Vince D.
    HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING, 2011, 32 (12) : 2075 - 2095
  • [25] Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis
    Li, Yichen
    Saxe, Rebecca
    Anzellotti, Stefano
    PLOS ONE, 2019, 14 (09):
  • [26] Biphasic hemodynamic responses influence deactivation and may mask activation in block-design fMRI paradigms
    Meltzer, Jed A.
    Negishi, Michiro
    Constable, R. Todd
    HUMAN BRAIN MAPPING, 2008, 29 (04) : 385 - 399
  • [27] Heterogeneous motor BOLD-fMRI responses in brain areas exhibiting negative BOLD cerebrovascular reactivity indicate that steal phenomenon does not always result from exhausted cerebrovascular reserve capacity
    van Niftrik, Christiaan Hendrik Bas
    Hiller, Aimee
    Sebok, Martina
    Halter, Matthias
    Duffin, James
    Fisher, Joseph A.
    Mikulis, David J.
    Regli, Luca
    Piccirelli, Marco
    Fierstra, Jorn
    MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING, 2023, 103 : 124 - 130
  • [28] Dynamic Bayesian network modeling of fMRI: A comparison of group-analysis methods
    Li, Junning
    Wang, Z. Jane
    Palmer, Samantha J.
    McKeown, Martin J.
    NEUROIMAGE, 2008, 41 (02) : 398 - 407
  • [29] Comparison of feature selection methods based on discrimination and reliability for fMRI decoding analysis
    Xu, Wenyan
    Li, Qing
    Liu, Xingyu
    Zhen, Zonglei
    Wu, Xia
    JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE METHODS, 2020, 335
  • [30] COMPARISON OF NONPARAMETRIC METHODS IN ANALYSIS OF CROSSOVER DESIGN
    CHAO, GC
    CORNELL, RG
    BIOMETRICS, 1978, 34 (04) : 728 - 728