Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
4
pubmed:dateCreated
2008-3-13
pubmed:abstractText
Before considering a given fMRI paradigm as a valid clinical tool, one should first assess the reliability of functional responses across subjects by establishing a normative database and defining a reference activation map that identifies major brain regions involved in the task at hand. However, the definition of such a reference map can be hindered by inter-individual functional variability. In this study, we analysed functional data obtained from 50 healthy subjects during a semantic language task to assess the influence of the number of subjects on the reference map and to characterise inter-individual functional variability. We first compared different group analysis approaches and showed that the extent of the activated network depends not only on the choice of the analysis approach but also on the statistical threshold used and the number of subjects included. This analysis suggested that, while the RFX analysis is suitable to detect confidently true positive activations, the other group approaches are useful for exploratory investigations in small samples. The application of quantitative measures at the voxel and regional levels suggested that while approximately 15-20 subjects were sufficient to reveal reliable and robust left hemisphere activations, >30 subjects were necessary for revealing more variable and weak right hemisphere ones. Finally, to visualise inter-individual variability, we combined two similarity indices that assess the percentages of true positive and false negative voxels in individual activation patterns relative to the group map. We suggest that these measures can be used for the estimation of the degree of 'normality' of functional responses in brain-damaged patients, where this question is often raised, and recommend the use of different quantifications to appreciate accurately the inter-individual functional variability that can be incorporated in group maps.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Apr
pubmed:issn
1065-9471
pubmed:author
pubmed:copyrightInfo
(c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
29
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
461-77
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Adult, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Brain, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Brain Injuries, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Brain Mapping, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Data Interpretation, Statistical, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Dominance, Cerebral, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-False Negative Reactions, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-False Positive Reactions, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Female, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Humans, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Language, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Language Tests, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Magnetic Resonance Imaging, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Male, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Nerve Net, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Observer Variation, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Sample Size, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Semantics, pubmed-meshheading:17538950-Verbal Behavior
pubmed:year
2008
pubmed:articleTitle
Group analysis and the subject factor in functional magnetic resonance imaging: analysis of fifty right-handed healthy subjects in a semantic language task.
pubmed:affiliation
Department of Radiology, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Comparative Study, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't