Quantitative Biology > Quantitative Methods
[Submitted on 27 Nov 2017 (this version), latest version 6 Sep 2018 (v4)]
Title:Autocorrelation bias still exists in fMRI results
View PDFAbstract:Given the recent trend towards validating the neuroimaging statistical methods, we compared the most popular functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analysis softwares: AFNI, FSL and SPM, with regard to temporal autocorrelation modelling. We used both resting state and task-based fMRI data, altogether 10 datasets containing 780 scans corresponding to different scanning sequences and different subject populations. In analyses of each fMRI scan we considered different assumed experimental designs, as well as different spatial smoothing levels and different detrending options. For data used as null data the use of FSL and SPM resulted in much higher false positive rates than the use of AFNI. On the other hand, due to SPM modelling temporal autocorrelation in the least flexible way, it can introduce negative autocorrelations during pre-whitening for scans with long repetition times. For one dataset we observed a big loss of sensitivity when SPM was used. Interestingly, because pre-whitening in FSL and SPM does not remove a substantial part of the temporal autocorrelation in the noise, we observed a relationship that the lower the assumed experimental design frequency, the more likely it was to observe significant activation. Though temporal autocorrelation modelling in AFNI was not perfect, its performance was much higher than the performance of temporal autocorrelation modelling in FSL and SPM. FSL and SPM could improve their autocorrelation modelling approaches for example adopting a noise model similar to the one used by AFNI.
Submission history
From: Wiktor Olszowy [view email][v1] Mon, 27 Nov 2017 18:49:44 UTC (280 KB)
[v2] Fri, 22 Dec 2017 16:27:58 UTC (950 KB)
[v3] Fri, 11 May 2018 17:56:42 UTC (1,439 KB)
[v4] Thu, 6 Sep 2018 15:03:57 UTC (1,133 KB)
References & Citations
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data and Media Associated with this Article
CatalyzeX Code Finder for Papers (What is CatalyzeX?)
DagsHub (What is DagsHub?)
Gotit.pub (What is GotitPub?)
Papers with Code (What is Papers with Code?)
ScienceCast (What is ScienceCast?)
Demos
Recommenders and Search Tools
Influence Flower (What are Influence Flowers?)
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
CORE Recommender (What is CORE?)
arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.