Automated quality assurance routines for fMRI data applied to a multicenter study

Standard procedures to achieve quality assessment (QA) of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data are of great importance. A standardized and fully automated procedure for QA is presented that allows for classification of data quality and the detection of artifacts by inspecting temporal variations. The application of the procedure on phantom measurements was used to check scanner and stimulation hardware performance. In vivo imaging data were checked efficiently for artifacts within the standard fMRI post‐processing procedure by realignment. Standardized and routinely carried out QA is essential for extensive data amounts as collected in fMRI, especially in multicenter studies. Furthermore, for the comparison of two different groups, it is important to ensure that data quality is approximately equal to avoid possible misinterpretations. This is shown by example, and criteria to quantify differences of data quality between two groups are defined. Hum Brain Mapp 25:237–246, 2005. © 2005 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

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

[2]  D Gibon,et al.  Automatic quality assessment protocol for MRI equipment. , 1999, Medical physics.

[3]  K H Chuang,et al.  IMPACT: Image‐based physiological artifacts estimation and correction technique for functional MRI , 2001, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[4]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Diagnosis and exploration of massively univariate neuroimaging models , 2003, NeuroImage.

[5]  J Sijbers,et al.  Estimation of the noise in magnitude MR images. , 1998, Magnetic resonance imaging.

[6]  Robert Freedman,et al.  Monitoring eye movements during fMRI tasks with echo planar images , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[7]  F. A. Seiler,et al.  Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing , 1989 .

[8]  Ranjan Maitra,et al.  Test‐retest reliability estimation of functional MRI data , 2002, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[9]  Peter M. Atkinson,et al.  Image processing, the fundamentals , 2001 .

[10]  Ramanathan Gnanadesikan.  Methods for Statistical Data Analysis of Multivariate Observations: Gnanadesikan/Methods , 1997 .

[11]  James T. Voyvodic,et al.  Real-Time fMRI Paradigm Control, Physiology, and Behavior Combined with Near Real-Time Statistical Analysis , 1999, NeuroImage.

[12]  T H Le,et al.  Methods for assessing accuracy and reliability in functional MRI , 1997, NMR in biomedicine.

[13]  William H. Press,et al.  The Art of Scientific Computing Second Edition , 1998 .

[14]  Karl J. Friston.  2 – Experimental Design and Statistical Issues , 2000 .

[15]  Keith R. Thulborn.  Quality Assurance in Clinical and Research Echo Planar Functional MRI , 2000 .

[16]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Optimization of experimental design in fMRI: a general framework using a genetic algorithm , 2003, NeuroImage.

[17]  Wilkin Chau,et al.  An Empirical Comparison of SPM Preprocessing Parameters to the Analysis of fMRI Data , 2002, NeuroImage.

[18]  S C Williams,et al.  Quality control for functional magnetic resonance imaging using automated data analysis and Shewhart charting , 1999, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[19]  P Magnusson,et al.  Image analysis methods for assessing levels of image plane nonuniformity and stochastic noise in a magnetic resonance image of a homogeneous phantom. , 2000, Medical physics.

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

[21]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Variability in fMRI: An Examination of Intersession Differences , 2000, NeuroImage.

[22]  J. Gower,et al.  Methods for statistical data analysis of multivariate observations , 1977, A Wiley publication in applied statistics.

[23]  Karl J. Friston.  Experimental design and statistical issues , 2000 .