ArticleStatistics in medicine2018
Time series analysis of fMRI data: Spatial modelling and Bayesian computation.
Article in Statistics in medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bayesian Spatial Binary Regression for Label Fusion in Structural Neuroimaging.Journal of the American Statistical Association · 2022Article
- Sources of information waste in neuroimaging: mishandling structures, thinking dichotomously, and over-reducing data.Aperture neuro · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Time series analysis of fMRI data is an important area of medical statistics for neuroimaging data. Spatial models and Bayesian approaches for inference in such models have advantages over more traditional mass univariate approaches; however, a major challenge for such analyses is the required computation. As a result, the neuroimaging community has embraced approximate Bayesian inference based on mean-field variational Bayes (VB) approximations. These approximations are implemented in standard software packages such as the popular statistical parametric mapping software. While computationally efficient, the quality of VB approximations remains unclear even though they are commonly used in the analysis of neuroimaging data. For reliable statistical inference, it is important that these approximations be accurate and that users understand the scenarios under which they may not be accurate. We consider this issue for a particular model that includes spatially varying coefficients. To examine the accuracy of the VB approximation, we derive Hamiltonian Monte Carlo (HMC) for this model and conduct simulation studies to compare its performance with VB in terms of estimation accuracy, posterior variability, the spatial smoothness of estimated images, and computation time. As expected, we find that the computation time required for VB is considerably less than that for HMC. In settings involving a high or moderate signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), we find that the 2 approaches produce very similar results suggesting that the VB approximation is useful in this setting. On the other hand, when one considers a low SNR, substantial differences are found, suggesting that the approximation may not be accurate in such cases and we demonstrate that VB produces Bayes estimators with larger mean squared error. A comparison of the 2 computational approaches in an application examining the hemodynamic response to face perception in addition to a comparison with the traditional mass univariate approach in this application is also considered. Overall, our work clarifies the usefulness of VB for the spatiotemporal analysis of fMRI data, while also pointing out the limitation of VB when the SNR is low and the utility of HMC in this case.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.