Comparison of a non‐stationary voxelation‐corrected cluster‐size test with TFCE for group‐Level MRI inference

Two powerful methods for statistical inference on MRI brain images have been proposed recently, a non‐stationary voxelation‐corrected cluster‐size test (CST) based on random field theory and threshold‐free cluster enhancement (TFCE) based on calculating the level of local support for a cluster, then using permutation testing for inference. Unlike other statistical approaches, these two methods do not rest on the assumptions of a uniform and high degree of spatial smoothness of the statistic image. Thus, they are strongly recommended for group‐level fMRI analysis compared to other statistical methods. In this work, the non‐stationary voxelation‐corrected CST and TFCE methods for group‐level analysis were evaluated for both stationary and non‐stationary images under varying smoothness levels, degrees of freedom and signal to noise ratios. Our results suggest that, both methods provide adequate control for the number of voxel‐wise statistical tests being performed during inference on fMRI data and they are both superior to current CSTs implemented in popular MRI data analysis software packages. However, TFCE is more sensitive and stable for group‐level analysis of VBM data. Thus, the voxelation‐corrected CST approach may confer some advantages by being computationally less demanding for fMRI data analysis than TFCE with permutation testing and by also being applicable for single‐subject fMRI analyses, while the TFCE approach is advantageous for VBM data. Hum Brain Mapp 38:1269–1280, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

[1]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Robust Smoothness Estimation in Statistical Parametric Maps Using Standardized Residuals from the General Linear Model , 1999, NeuroImage.

[2]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  A voxelation-corrected non-stationary 3D cluster-size test based on random field theory , 2015, NeuroImage.

[3]  Keith J. Worsley,et al.  Applications of Random Fields in Human Brain Mapping , 2001 .

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

[5]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Topological FDR for neuroimaging , 2010, NeuroImage.

[6]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  Threshold-free cluster enhancement: Addressing problems of smoothing, threshold dependence and localisation in cluster inference , 2009, NeuroImage.

[7]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Improved Assessment of Significant Activation in Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI): Use of a Cluster‐Size Threshold , 1995, Magnetic resonance in medicine.

[8]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Detecting changes in nonisotropic images , 1999, Human brain mapping.

[9]  Yang Fan,et al.  A high performance 3D cluster-based test of unsmoothed fMRI data , 2014, NeuroImage.

[10]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Assessing the significance of focal activations using their spatial extent , 1994, Human brain mapping.

[11]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Thresholding of Statistical Maps in Functional Neuroimaging Using the False Discovery Rate , 2002, NeuroImage.

[12]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  False positives in neuroimaging genetics using voxel-based morphometry data , 2011, NeuroImage.

[13]  Hans Knutsson,et al.  Cluster failure: Why fMRI inferences for spatial extent have inflated false-positive rates , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  False discovery rate revisited: FDR and topological inference using Gaussian random fields , 2009, NeuroImage.

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

[16]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Resting-state fMRI in the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[17]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Nonstationary cluster-size inference with random field and permutation methods , 2004, NeuroImage.

[18]  Chunxiao Zhou,et al.  New blockwise permutation tests preserving exchangeability in functional neuroimaging , 2009, 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[19]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: A primer with examples , 2002, Human brain mapping.

[20]  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.

[21]  Thomas E. Nichols,et al.  Adjusting the effect of nonstationarity in cluster-based and TFCE inference , 2011, NeuroImage.

[22]  Mark Jenkinson,et al.  The minimal preprocessing pipelines for the Human Connectome Project , 2013, NeuroImage.

[23]  Timothy Edward John Behrens,et al.  Anatomically related grey and white matter abnormalities in adolescent-onset schizophrenia. , 2007, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[24]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  False Discovery Rates for Spatial Signals , 2007 .