ArticleNeuroinformatics2022
Pitfalls and Recommended Strategies and Metrics for Suppressing Motion Artifacts in Functional MRI.
Article in Neuroinformatics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Network Representation of fMRI Data Using Visibility Graphs: The Impact of Motion and Test-Retest Reliability.Neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- Functional magnetic resonance imaging in schizophrenia: current evidence, methodological advances, limitations and future directions.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2024Article
- Less is more: balancing noise reduction and data retention in fMRI with data-driven scrubbing.NeuroImage · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (rs-fMRI), artefactual signals arising from subject motion can dwarf and obfuscate the neuronal activity signal. Typical motion correction approaches involve the generation of nuisance regressors, which are timeseries of non-brain signals regressed out of the fMRI timeseries to yield putatively artifact-free data. Recent work suggests that concatenating all regressors into a single regression model is more effective than the sequential application of individual regressors, which may reintroduce previously removed artifacts. This work compares 18 motion correction pipelines consisting of head motion, independent components analysis, and non-neuronal physiological signal regressors in sequential or concatenated combinations. The pipelines are evaluated on a dataset of cognitively normal individuals with repeat imaging and on datasets of studies of Autism Spectrum Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder, and Parkinson's Disease. Extensive metrics of motion artifact removal are measured, including resting state network recovery, Quality Control-Functional Connectivity (QC-FC) correlation, distance-dependent artifact, network modularity, and test-retest reliability of multiple rs-fMRI analyses. The results reveal limitations in previously proposed metrics, including the QC-FC correlation and modularity quality, and identify more robust artifact removal metrics. The results also reveal limitations in the concatenated regression approach, which is outperformed by the sequential regression approach in the test-retest reliability metrics. Finally, pipelines are recommended that perform well based on quantitative and qualitative comparisons across multiple datasets and robust metrics. These new insights and recommendations help address the need for effective motion artifact correction to reduce noise and confounds in rs-fMRI.
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.