Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23836423›Full record

ArticleCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2013

Toward a neurometric foundation for probabilistic independent component analysis of fMRI data.

Andrew B Poppe, Krista Wisner, Gowtham Atluri, Kelvin O Lim, Vipin Kumar, Angus W Macdonald

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Network Neuroscience and Personality.Personality neuroscience · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrew B PoppeDepartment of Psychology, University of Minnesota, N426 Elliott Hall , 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN, 55455, USA, poppe076@umn.edu.
Krista Wisner
Gowtham Atluri
Kelvin O Lim
Vipin Kumar
Angus W Macdonald

Funding

Cognitive Neurocomputational Task Reliability and Clinical Applications ConsortiumR01MH084840 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI Deanna Barch, Cameron S. Carter · 2008 to 2026
$8.5M
4/5-Cognitive Neuroscience Task Reliability & Clinical Applications ConsortiumR01MH084821 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND BALTIMORE · PI GOLD, JAMES M. · 2008 to 2023
$4.2M
2/5-Cognitive Neuroscience Task Reliability & Clinical Applications ConsortiumR01MH084826 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-IRVINE · PI CARTER, CAMERON S. · 2008 to 2023
$4.0M
White Matter Abnormalities in SchizophreniaR01MH060662 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI LIM, KELVIN O. · 2001 to 2010
$3.8M
5/5-Cognitive Neuroscience Task Reliability & Clinical Applications ConsortiumR01MH084861 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI MACDONALD, ANGUS W · 2008 to 2024
$3.8M
Cognitive Neurocomputational Task Reliability & Clinical Applications ConsortiumR01MH084828 · NIMH · UNIV OF MED/DENT NJ-R W JOHNSON MED SCH · PI SILVERSTEIN, STEVEN M · 2008 to 2024
$3.3M
RESEARCH IN PSYCHOPATHOLOGYT32MH017069 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI LUCIANA, MONICA · 1985 to 2011
$2.2M
NIMH NIH HHS 5R01MH084821-03S1NIMH NIH HHS 5R01MH084826-03S1NIMH NIH HHS 5R01MH084828-0S13NIMH NIH HHS 5R01MH084840-03S1NIMH NIH HHS 5R01MH084861-03S1NIMH NIH HHS 5T32MH017069-29NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH060662NIMH NIH HHS R01MH060662NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH084861
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Improved fMRI data analysis methods hold promise for breakthroughs in cognitive and affective neuroscience. Group probabilistic independent component analysis (pICA), such as that implemented by MELODIC (Beckmann & Smith IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging 23:137-152, 2004), is one popular technique that typifies this development. Recently pICA has been proposed to be a reliable method for studying connectivity networks (Zuo et al. NeuroImage 49:2163-2177, 2010); however, there is no "standard" way to complete a pICA, and the full impact of the options on neurometric properties of resulting components is unknown. In the present study, we sought to assess the robustness, reproducibility, and within-subject test-retest reliability of ICA in two data sets: The first included 30 subjects imaged 3 weeks apart while completing a cognitive control task, and the second included 27 subjects imaged 9 months apart during rest. In addition to examining the impact of analytic parameters on the neurometrics, this study was the first to simultaneously investigate within-subject reliability of ICA-derived components from rest and task fMRI data. Results suggested that for both task and rest, meta-level analyses using 25 subject orders optimized robustness of the components. The impact of dimensionality and voxel threshold for components was subsequently examined regarding properties of reproducibility and within-subject retest reliability. Component thresholds between 0.2 and 0.6 of the maximum value optimized reproducibility across multiple dimensionalities and produced generally fair to moderate reliability estimates (Cicchetti & Sparrow American Journal of Mental Deficiency 86:127-137, 1981). These guidelines strengthen the foundation for this data-driven approach to fMRI analysis by providing prescriptive findings and a descriptive set of neurometrics for resting-state and task fMRI.

Indexed as

BiometryMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAlgorithmsBrainBrain MappingFemaleHumansMaleProbabilityReproducibility of ResultsRestStatistics as TopicYoung Adult

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.