Comparison of three methods for generating group statistical inferences from independent component analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data

Purpose To evaluate the relative effectiveness of three previously proposed methods of performing group independent component analysis (ICA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. Materials and Methods Data were generated via computer simulation. Components were added to a varying num...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of magnetic resonance imaging 2004-03, Vol.19 (3), p.365-368
Hauptverfasser: Schmithorst, Vincent J., Holland, Scott K.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 368
container_issue 3
container_start_page 365
container_title Journal of magnetic resonance imaging
container_volume 19
creator Schmithorst, Vincent J.
Holland, Scott K.
description Purpose To evaluate the relative effectiveness of three previously proposed methods of performing group independent component analysis (ICA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. Materials and Methods Data were generated via computer simulation. Components were added to a varying number of subjects between 1 and 20, and intersubject variability was simulated for both the added sources and their associated time courses. Three methods of group ICA analyses were performed: across‐subject averaging, subject‐wise concatenation, and row‐wise concatenation (e.g., across time courses). Results Concatenating across subjects provided the best overall performance in terms of accurate estimation of the sources and associated time courses. Averaging across subjects provided accurate estimation (R > 0.9) of the time courses when the sources were present in a sufficient fraction (about 15%) of 100 subjects. Concatenating across time courses was shown not to be a feasible method when unique sources were added to the data from each subject, simulating the effects of motion and susceptibility artifacts. Conclusion Subject‐wise concatenation should be used when computationally feasible. For studies involving a large number of subjects, across‐subject averaging provides an acceptable alternative and reduces the computational load. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004;19:365–368. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jmri.20009
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71695815</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>71695815</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3999-ab00958685b51d5a395b45119801627db7113b462a251b9f9d6763216d84bd093</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kc1u1DAQgC1ERUvhwgMgnzggpfVP7MRHtEApKiBVII6Wk0y2Lomd2olgH6Vvy4Tdwo2LPTP6_I3tIeQFZ2ecMXF-OyZ_Jhhj5hE54UqIQqhaP8aYKVnwmlXH5GnOtythSvWEHPMSA8n0CbnfxHFyyecYaOzpfJMA6AjzTewy7WOiWwiQ3OzDlm5TXCaaZ8zy7Fs3UB96SBBaQDbFEfMOJsAlzLRFcQxr5IIbdtnntUG_hHb2ESt0dNsA6KEJsLtDC_VYWzt1bnbPyFHvhgzPD_sp-fb-3dfNh-Lqy8Xl5s1V0UpjTOEafBU-t1aN4p1y0qimVJybmnEtqq6pOJdNqYUTijemN52utBRcd3XZdMzIU_Jq751SvFsgz3b0uYVhcAHikm3FNfq5QvD1HmxTzDlBb6eEF047y5ldB2HXQdg_g0D45cG6NCN0_9DDzyPA98BPP8DuPyr78dP15YO02J_B_4dff8-49MPqSlbKfv98YYV-q8V1ya2QvwEE1KUg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>71695815</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of three methods for generating group statistical inferences from independent component analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data</title><source>Wiley Online Library website</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Wiley Online Library Journals</source><creator>Schmithorst, Vincent J. ; Holland, Scott K.</creator><creatorcontrib>Schmithorst, Vincent J. ; Holland, Scott K.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose To evaluate the relative effectiveness of three previously proposed methods of performing group independent component analysis (ICA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. Materials and Methods Data were generated via computer simulation. Components were added to a varying number of subjects between 1 and 20, and intersubject variability was simulated for both the added sources and their associated time courses. Three methods of group ICA analyses were performed: across‐subject averaging, subject‐wise concatenation, and row‐wise concatenation (e.g., across time courses). Results Concatenating across subjects provided the best overall performance in terms of accurate estimation of the sources and associated time courses. Averaging across subjects provided accurate estimation (R &gt; 0.9) of the time courses when the sources were present in a sufficient fraction (about 15%) of 100 subjects. Concatenating across time courses was shown not to be a feasible method when unique sources were added to the data from each subject, simulating the effects of motion and susceptibility artifacts. Conclusion Subject‐wise concatenation should be used when computationally feasible. For studies involving a large number of subjects, across‐subject averaging provides an acceptable alternative and reduces the computational load. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004;19:365–368. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1053-1807</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-2586</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jmri.20009</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14994306</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Hoboken: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</publisher><subject>algorithms ; Computer Simulation - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Data Interpretation, Statistical ; data-driven methodologies ; functional MRI ; Humans ; image processing ; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods ; information theory ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Models, Neurological ; Normal Distribution ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Journal of magnetic resonance imaging, 2004-03, Vol.19 (3), p.365-368</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3999-ab00958685b51d5a395b45119801627db7113b462a251b9f9d6763216d84bd093</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3999-ab00958685b51d5a395b45119801627db7113b462a251b9f9d6763216d84bd093</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjmri.20009$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjmri.20009$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,1433,27924,27925,45574,45575,46409,46833</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14994306$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Schmithorst, Vincent J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holland, Scott K.</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of three methods for generating group statistical inferences from independent component analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data</title><title>Journal of magnetic resonance imaging</title><addtitle>J. Magn. Reson. Imaging</addtitle><description>Purpose To evaluate the relative effectiveness of three previously proposed methods of performing group independent component analysis (ICA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. Materials and Methods Data were generated via computer simulation. Components were added to a varying number of subjects between 1 and 20, and intersubject variability was simulated for both the added sources and their associated time courses. Three methods of group ICA analyses were performed: across‐subject averaging, subject‐wise concatenation, and row‐wise concatenation (e.g., across time courses). Results Concatenating across subjects provided the best overall performance in terms of accurate estimation of the sources and associated time courses. Averaging across subjects provided accurate estimation (R &gt; 0.9) of the time courses when the sources were present in a sufficient fraction (about 15%) of 100 subjects. Concatenating across time courses was shown not to be a feasible method when unique sources were added to the data from each subject, simulating the effects of motion and susceptibility artifacts. Conclusion Subject‐wise concatenation should be used when computationally feasible. For studies involving a large number of subjects, across‐subject averaging provides an acceptable alternative and reduces the computational load. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004;19:365–368. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</description><subject>algorithms</subject><subject>Computer Simulation - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Data Interpretation, Statistical</subject><subject>data-driven methodologies</subject><subject>functional MRI</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>image processing</subject><subject>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods</subject><subject>information theory</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Models, Neurological</subject><subject>Normal Distribution</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>1053-1807</issn><issn>1522-2586</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kc1u1DAQgC1ERUvhwgMgnzggpfVP7MRHtEApKiBVII6Wk0y2Lomd2olgH6Vvy4Tdwo2LPTP6_I3tIeQFZ2ecMXF-OyZ_Jhhj5hE54UqIQqhaP8aYKVnwmlXH5GnOtythSvWEHPMSA8n0CbnfxHFyyecYaOzpfJMA6AjzTewy7WOiWwiQ3OzDlm5TXCaaZ8zy7Fs3UB96SBBaQDbFEfMOJsAlzLRFcQxr5IIbdtnntUG_hHb2ESt0dNsA6KEJsLtDC_VYWzt1bnbPyFHvhgzPD_sp-fb-3dfNh-Lqy8Xl5s1V0UpjTOEafBU-t1aN4p1y0qimVJybmnEtqq6pOJdNqYUTijemN52utBRcd3XZdMzIU_Jq751SvFsgz3b0uYVhcAHikm3FNfq5QvD1HmxTzDlBb6eEF047y5ldB2HXQdg_g0D45cG6NCN0_9DDzyPA98BPP8DuPyr78dP15YO02J_B_4dff8-49MPqSlbKfv98YYV-q8V1ya2QvwEE1KUg</recordid><startdate>200403</startdate><enddate>200403</enddate><creator>Schmithorst, Vincent J.</creator><creator>Holland, Scott K.</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200403</creationdate><title>Comparison of three methods for generating group statistical inferences from independent component analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data</title><author>Schmithorst, Vincent J. ; Holland, Scott K.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3999-ab00958685b51d5a395b45119801627db7113b462a251b9f9d6763216d84bd093</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>algorithms</topic><topic>Computer Simulation - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Data Interpretation, Statistical</topic><topic>data-driven methodologies</topic><topic>functional MRI</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>image processing</topic><topic>Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods</topic><topic>information theory</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Models, Neurological</topic><topic>Normal Distribution</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Schmithorst, Vincent J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Holland, Scott K.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of magnetic resonance imaging</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Schmithorst, Vincent J.</au><au>Holland, Scott K.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of three methods for generating group statistical inferences from independent component analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data</atitle><jtitle>Journal of magnetic resonance imaging</jtitle><addtitle>J. Magn. Reson. Imaging</addtitle><date>2004-03</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>365</spage><epage>368</epage><pages>365-368</pages><issn>1053-1807</issn><eissn>1522-2586</eissn><abstract>Purpose To evaluate the relative effectiveness of three previously proposed methods of performing group independent component analysis (ICA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. Materials and Methods Data were generated via computer simulation. Components were added to a varying number of subjects between 1 and 20, and intersubject variability was simulated for both the added sources and their associated time courses. Three methods of group ICA analyses were performed: across‐subject averaging, subject‐wise concatenation, and row‐wise concatenation (e.g., across time courses). Results Concatenating across subjects provided the best overall performance in terms of accurate estimation of the sources and associated time courses. Averaging across subjects provided accurate estimation (R &gt; 0.9) of the time courses when the sources were present in a sufficient fraction (about 15%) of 100 subjects. Concatenating across time courses was shown not to be a feasible method when unique sources were added to the data from each subject, simulating the effects of motion and susceptibility artifacts. Conclusion Subject‐wise concatenation should be used when computationally feasible. For studies involving a large number of subjects, across‐subject averaging provides an acceptable alternative and reduces the computational load. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2004;19:365–368. © 2004 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.</abstract><cop>Hoboken</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company</pub><pmid>14994306</pmid><doi>10.1002/jmri.20009</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1053-1807
ispartof Journal of magnetic resonance imaging, 2004-03, Vol.19 (3), p.365-368
issn 1053-1807
1522-2586
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71695815
source Wiley Online Library website; MEDLINE; Wiley Online Library Journals
subjects algorithms
Computer Simulation - statistics & numerical data
Data Interpretation, Statistical
data-driven methodologies
functional MRI
Humans
image processing
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods
information theory
Magnetic Resonance Imaging - statistics & numerical data
Models, Neurological
Normal Distribution
Time Factors
title Comparison of three methods for generating group statistical inferences from independent component analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging data
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T07%3A17%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20three%20methods%20for%20generating%20group%20statistical%20inferences%20from%20independent%20component%20analysis%20of%20functional%20magnetic%20resonance%20imaging%20data&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20magnetic%20resonance%20imaging&rft.au=Schmithorst,%20Vincent%20J.&rft.date=2004-03&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=365&rft.epage=368&rft.pages=365-368&rft.issn=1053-1807&rft.eissn=1522-2586&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jmri.20009&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E71695815%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=71695815&rft_id=info:pmid/14994306&rfr_iscdi=true