Spatially adaptive subject level analyses improve random effects fMRI group studies

Inter-subject analysis of functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) data relies on single intra-subject studies, which are usually conducted using a massively univariate approach. In this paper, we investigate the impact of an improved intra-subject analysis on group studies. Our approach is based on the use of Adaptive Spatial Mixture Models within a joint detection-estimation (JDE) framework [1]. In this setting, spatial variability is achieved at a regional scale by the explicit characterization of the hemodynamic filter and at the voxel scale by an adaptive spatial correlation model between condition-specific effects. For the group statistics, we conducted several Random effect analyses (RFX) which relied either on SPM or JDE intra-subject analyses. We performed a comparative study on two different real datasets involving the same paradigm and the same 15 subjects but eliciting different noise levels by varying the acceleration factor (R=2 and R=4) in parallel MRI acquisition. We show that brain activations appear more spatially resolved using JDE instead of SPM and that a better sensitivity is achieved. Moreover, the JDE framework provides more robust detection performance by maintaining satisfying results on our most noisy real dataset.

[1]  E. Ziegel Permutation, Parametric, and Bootstrap Tests of Hypotheses (3rd ed.) , 2005 .

[2]  Alexis Roche,et al.  Improved fMRI group studies based on spatially varying non-parametric BOLD signal modeling , 2008, 2008 5th IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: From Nano to Macro.

[3]  Mark W. Woolrich,et al.  Fully Bayesian spatio-temporal modeling of FMRI data , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[4]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  A general statistical analysis for fMRI data , 2000, NeuroImage.

[5]  Laurent Risser,et al.  Min-max Extrapolation Scheme for Fast Estimation of 3D Potts Field Partition Functions. Application to the Joint Detection-Estimation of Brain Activity in fMRI , 2011, J. Signal Process. Syst..

[6]  J. Pesquet,et al.  Minimization of a sparsity promoting criterion for the recovery of complex-valued signals , 2009 .

[7]  Benjamin Thyreau,et al.  Anatomo-Functional Description of the Brain : A Probabilistic Approach , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics Speech and Signal Processing Proceedings.

[8]  Jean-Baptiste Poline,et al.  Dealing with the shortcomings of spatial normalization: Multi‐subject parcellation of fMRI datasets , 2006, Human brain mapping.

[9]  Bertrand Thirion,et al.  A fully Bayesian approach to the parcel-based detection-estimation of brain activity in fMRI , 2008, NeuroImage.

[10]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Variational Bayesian inference for fMRI time series , 2003, NeuroImage.

[11]  Bertrand Thirion,et al.  Robust statistics for nonparametric group analysis in fMRI , 2006, 3rd IEEE International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging: Nano to Macro, 2006..

[12]  Mark D'Esposito,et al.  Variation of BOLD hemodynamic responses across subjects and brain regions and their effects on statistical analyses , 2004, NeuroImage.

[13]  Laurent Risser,et al.  Spatially adaptive mixture modeling for analysis of fMRI time series , 2009, NeuroImage.