TY - JOUR
T1 - The efficiency of fMRI region of interest analysis methods for detecting group differences
AU - Hutchison, Joanna L.
AU - Hubbard, Nicholas A.
AU - Brigante, Ryan M.
AU - Turner, Monroe
AU - Sandoval, Traci I.
AU - Hillis, G. Andrew J
AU - Weaver, Travis
AU - Rypma, Bart
N1 - Funding Information:
This paper includes data that were accepted in a peer-reviewed abstract and presented via electronic poster at the Joint Annual Meeting of the International Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine and the European Society for Magnetic Resonance in Medicine and Biology, Stockholm, Sweden, May 2010. This work was supported by VA IDIQ contract number VA549-P-0027 awarded and administered by the Dallas, TX VA Medical Center, by NIH (NCRR) Grant Number UL1RR024982 , and by DOD grant no. DAMD 17-01-1-0741 from the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command . The content of this paper does not necessarily reflect the position or the policy of the U.S. government, and no official endorsement should be inferred. This research was also funded in part by NIH grant 1R01AG029523 (BR).
PY - 2014/4/15
Y1 - 2014/4/15
N2 - Background: Using a standard space brain template is an efficient way of determining region-of-interest (ROI) boundaries for functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data analyses. However, ROIs based on landmarks on subject-specific (i.e., native space) brain surfaces are anatomically accurate and probably best reflect the regional blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) response for the individual. Unfortunately, accurate native space ROIs are often time-intensive to delineate even when using automated methods. New method: We compared analyses of group differences when using standard versus native space ROIs using both volume and surface-based analyses. Collegiate and military-veteran participants completed a button press task and a digit-symbol verification task during fMRI acquisition. Data were analyzed within ROIs representing left and right motor and prefrontal cortices, in native and standard space. Volume and surface-based analysis results were also compared using both functional (i.e., percent signal change) and structural (i.e., voxel or node count) approaches. Results and comparison with existing method(s): Results suggest that transformation into standard space can affect the outcome of structural and functional analyses (inflating/minimizing differences, based on cortical geography), and these transformations can affect conclusions regarding group differences with volumetric data. Conclusions: Caution is advised when applying standard space ROIs to volumetric fMRI data. However, volumetric analyses show group differences and are appropriate in circumstances when time is limited. Surface-based analyses using functional ROIs generated the greatest group differences and were less susceptible to differences between native and standard space. We conclude that surface-based analyses are preferable with adequate time and computing resources.
AB - Background: Using a standard space brain template is an efficient way of determining region-of-interest (ROI) boundaries for functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data analyses. However, ROIs based on landmarks on subject-specific (i.e., native space) brain surfaces are anatomically accurate and probably best reflect the regional blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) response for the individual. Unfortunately, accurate native space ROIs are often time-intensive to delineate even when using automated methods. New method: We compared analyses of group differences when using standard versus native space ROIs using both volume and surface-based analyses. Collegiate and military-veteran participants completed a button press task and a digit-symbol verification task during fMRI acquisition. Data were analyzed within ROIs representing left and right motor and prefrontal cortices, in native and standard space. Volume and surface-based analysis results were also compared using both functional (i.e., percent signal change) and structural (i.e., voxel or node count) approaches. Results and comparison with existing method(s): Results suggest that transformation into standard space can affect the outcome of structural and functional analyses (inflating/minimizing differences, based on cortical geography), and these transformations can affect conclusions regarding group differences with volumetric data. Conclusions: Caution is advised when applying standard space ROIs to volumetric fMRI data. However, volumetric analyses show group differences and are appropriate in circumstances when time is limited. Surface-based analyses using functional ROIs generated the greatest group differences and were less susceptible to differences between native and standard space. We conclude that surface-based analyses are preferable with adequate time and computing resources.
KW - Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)
KW - Group differences
KW - Native space
KW - Region-of-interest (ROI)
KW - Standard space
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84894217600&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84894217600&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.01.012
DO - 10.1016/j.jneumeth.2014.01.012
M3 - Article
C2 - 24487017
AN - SCOPUS:84894217600
SN - 0165-0270
VL - 226
SP - 57
EP - 65
JO - Journal of Neuroscience Methods
JF - Journal of Neuroscience Methods
ER -