Motion correction and the use of motion covariates in multiple‐subject fMRI analysis

The impact of using motion estimates as covariates of no interest was examined in general linear modeling (GLM) of both block design and rapid event‐related functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data. The purpose of motion correction is to identify and eliminate artifacts caused by task‐correlated motion while maximizing sensitivity to true activations. To optimize this process, a combination of motion correction approaches was applied to data from 33 subjects performing both a block‐design and an event‐related fMRI experiment, including analysis: (1) without motion correction; (2) with motion correction alone; (3) with motion‐corrected data and motion covariates included in the GLM; and (4) with non–motion‐corrected data and motion covariates included in the GLM. Inclusion of covariates was found to be generally useful for increasing the sensitivity of GLM results in the analysis of event‐related data. When motion parameters were included in the GLM for event‐related data, it made little difference if motion correction was actually applied to the data. For the block design, inclusion of motion covariates had a deleterious impact on GLM sensitivity when even moderate correlation existed between motion and the experimental design. Based on these results, we present a general strategy for block designs, event‐related designs, and hybrid designs to identify and eliminate probable motion artifacts while maximizing sensitivity to true activations. Hum. Brain Mapp, 2006. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  M. D’Esposito,et al.  A Trial-Based Experimental Design for fMRI , 1997, NeuroImage.

[2]  R. Buckner,et al.  Dissociating State and Item Components of Recognition Memory Using fMRI , 2001, NeuroImage.

[3]  Bruce R. Rosen,et al.  Motion detection and correction in functional MR imaging , 1995 .

[4]  Richard J. Davidson,et al.  Comparison of fMRI motion correction software tools , 2005, NeuroImage.

[5]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Event-related fMRI , 1997 .

[6]  E. Stein,et al.  Right hemispheric dominance of inhibitory control: an event-related functional MRI study. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  A unified statistical approach for determining significant signals in images of cerebral activation , 1996, Human brain mapping.

[8]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Reproducibility of fMRI Results across Four Institutions Using a Spatial Working Memory Task , 1998, NeuroImage.

[9]  J. Mazziotta,et al.  Rapid Automated Algorithm for Aligning and Reslicing PET Images , 1992, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[10]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Event‐related f MRI , 1997, Human brain mapping.

[11]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Movement‐Related effects in fMRI time‐series , 1996, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[12]  R. Turner,et al.  Characterization and Correction of Interpolation Effects in the Realignment of fMRI Time Series , 2000, NeuroImage.

[13]  Edward E. Smith,et al.  Temporal dynamics of brain activation during a working memory task , 1997, Nature.

[14]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Spatial registration and normalization of images , 1995 .

[15]  Y. Yen,et al.  False cerebral activation on BOLD functional MR images: study of low-amplitude motion weakly correlated to stimulus. , 2000, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[16]  V L Morgan,et al.  Comparison of functional MRI image realignment tools using a computer‐generated phantom , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[17]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Validating cluster size inference: random field and permutation methods , 2003, NeuroImage.

[18]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  A General Statistical Analysis for fMRI Data , 2000, NeuroImage.

[19]  J. Jonides,et al.  Dissociating verbal and spatial working memory using PET. , 1996, Cerebral cortex.

[20]  J C Mazziotta,et al.  Automated image registration: II. Intersubject validation of linear and nonlinear models. , 1998, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[21]  J. Hajnal,et al.  Artifacts due to stimulus correlated motion in functional imaging of the brain , 1994, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[22]  Michael Brady,et al.  Improved Optimization for the Robust and Accurate Linear Registration and Motion Correction of Brain Images , 2002, NeuroImage.

[23]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Automated image registration: I. General methods and intrasubject, intramodality validation. , 1998, Journal of computer assisted tomography.

[24]  J D Watson,et al.  Nonparametric Analysis of Statistic Images from Functional Mapping Experiments , 1996, Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism.

[25]  R W Cox,et al.  Event‐related fMRI of tasks involving brief motion , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[26]  R W Cox,et al.  AFNI: software for analysis and visualization of functional magnetic resonance neuroimages. , 1996, Computers and biomedical research, an international journal.

[27]  K. Kiehl,et al.  Event‐related fMRI study of response inhibition , 2001, Human brain mapping.