False positive control of activated voxels in single fMRI analysis using bootstrap resampling in comparison to spatial smoothing.

Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is an effective tool for the measurement of brain neuronal activities. To date, several statistical methods have been proposed for analyzing fMRI datasets to select true active voxels among all the voxels appear to be positively activated. Finding a reliable and valid activation map is very important and becomes more crucial in clinical and neurosurgical investigations of single fMRI data, especially when pre-surgical planning requires accurate lateralization index as well as a precise localization of activation map. Defining a proper threshold to determine true activated regions, using common statistical processes, is a challenging task. This is due to a number of variation sources such as noise, artifacts, and physiological fluctuations in time series of fMRI data which affect spatial distribution of noise in an expected uniform activated region. Spatial smoothing methods are frequently used as a preprocessing step to reduce the effect of noise and artifacts. The smoothing may lead to a shift and enlargement of activation regions, and in some extend, unification of distinct regions. In this article, we propose a bootstrap resampling technique for analyzing single fMRI dataset with the aim of finding more accurate and reliable activated regions. This method can remove false positive voxels and present high localization accuracy in activation map without any spatial smoothing and statistical threshold setting.

[1]  J. Pekar,et al.  Whole-brain functional mapping with isotropic MR imaging. , 1996, Radiology.

[2]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Multi-level bootstrap analysis of stable clusters in resting-state fMRI , 2009, NeuroImage.

[3]  M Diemling,et al.  Reproducibility and postprocessing of gradient-echo functional MRI to improve localization of brain activity in the human visual cortex. , 1996, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[4]  B. Biswal,et al.  Use of Jackknife Resampling Techniques to Estimate the Confidence Intervals of fMRI Parameters , 2001, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[5]  N. F. Ramsey,et al.  Reproducibility of fMRI-Determined Language Lateralization in Individual Subjects , 2002, Brain and Language.

[6]  C. Genovese,et al.  Estimating test‐retest reliability in functional MR imaging I: Statistical methodology , 1997, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[7]  Jarkko Ylipaavalniemi,et al.  Analyzing consistency of independent components: An fMRI illustration , 2008, NeuroImage.

[8]  F. Darki,et al.  Accurate activation map detection using bootstrap resampling of single fMRI data , 2009, 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[9]  I Kanno,et al.  Statistical methods for detecting activated regions in functional MRI of the brain. , 1998, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[10]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Bootstrap generation and evaluation of an fMRI simulation database. , 2009, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[11]  Shing-Chung Ngan,et al.  Cluster Significance Testing Using the Bootstrap , 2002, NeuroImage.

[12]  S. T. Buckland,et al.  An Introduction to the Bootstrap. , 1994 .

[13]  P. Hluštík,et al.  Effects of spatial smoothing on fMRI group inferences. , 2008, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[14]  N. Andreasen,et al.  Anatomic and Functional Variability: The Effects of Filter Size in Group fMRI Data Analysis , 2001, NeuroImage.

[15]  G. Fesl,et al.  Reproducibility of activation in four motor paradigms , 2006, Journal of Neurology.

[16]  Brian D. Ripley,et al.  A New Statistical Approach to Detecting Significant Activation in Functional MRI , 2000, NeuroImage.

[17]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Regionally Specific Sensitivity Differences in fMRI and PET: Where Do They Come From? , 2000, NeuroImage.

[18]  F. Chollet,et al.  Within-Session and Between-Session Reproducibility of Cerebral Sensorimotor Activation: A Test–Retest Effect Evidenced with Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2001, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[19]  S. Rombouts,et al.  Test-retest analysis with functional MR of the activated area in the human visual cortex. , 1997, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[20]  Rupert Lanzenberger,et al.  Influence of fMRI smoothing procedures on replicability of fine scale motor localization , 2005, NeuroImage.

[21]  N Jon Shah,et al.  Assessment of reliability in functional imaging studies , 2003, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[22]  D C Noll,et al.  Estimating test‐retest reliability in functional MR imaging II: Application to motor and cognitive activation studies , 1997, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[23]  F Barkhof,et al.  fMRI of visual encoding: Reproducibility of activation , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[24]  K. Kiehl,et al.  Reproducibility of the hemodynamic response to auditory oddball stimuli: A six‐week test–retest study , 2003, Human brain mapping.

[25]  Jens Frahm,et al.  On the Effects of Spatial Filtering—A Comparative fMRI Study of Episodic Memory Encoding at High and Low Resolution , 2002, NeuroImage.

[26]  J A Frank,et al.  Reproducibility of human 3D fMRI brain maps acquired during a motor task , 1996, Human brain mapping.

[27]  R. Cox,et al.  Test-retest precision of functional MR in sensory and motor task activation. , 1996, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.