Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.

Noise is a major challenge for the analysis of fMRI data in general and for connectivity analyses in particular. As researchers develop increasingly sophisticated tools to model statistical dependence between the fMRI signal in different brain regions, there is a risk that these models may increasin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Yichen Li, Rebecca Saxe, Stefano Anzellotti
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2019-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222914
id doaj-51862160cbc84e84982d789c7a647347
record_format Article
spelling doaj-51862160cbc84e84982d789c7a6473472021-03-03T21:21:48ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032019-01-01149e022291410.1371/journal.pone.0222914Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.Yichen LiRebecca SaxeStefano AnzellottiNoise is a major challenge for the analysis of fMRI data in general and for connectivity analyses in particular. As researchers develop increasingly sophisticated tools to model statistical dependence between the fMRI signal in different brain regions, there is a risk that these models may increasingly capture artifactual relationships between regions, that are the result of noise. Thus, choosing optimal denoising methods is a crucial step to maximize the accuracy and reproducibility of connectivity models. Most comparisons between denoising methods require knowledge of the ground truth: of what is the 'real signal'. For this reason, they are usually based on simulated fMRI data. However, simulated data may not match the statistical properties of real data, limiting the generalizability of the conclusions. In this article, we propose an approach to evaluate denoising methods using real (non-simulated) fMRI data. First, we introduce an intersubject version of multivariate pattern dependence (iMVPD) that computes the statistical dependence between a brain region in one participant, and another brain region in a different participant. iMVPD has the following advantages: 1) it is multivariate, 2) it trains and tests models on independent partitions of the real fMRI data, and 3) it generates predictions that are both between subjects and between regions. Since whole-brain sources of noise are more strongly correlated within subject than between subjects, we can use the difference between standard MVPD and iMVPD as a 'discrepancy metric' to evaluate denoising techniques (where more effective techniques should yield smaller differences). As predicted, the difference is the greatest in the absence of denoising methods. Furthermore, a combination of removal of the global signal and CompCorr optimizes denoising (among the set of denoising options tested).https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222914
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Yichen Li
Rebecca Saxe
Stefano Anzellotti
spellingShingle Yichen Li
Rebecca Saxe
Stefano Anzellotti
Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Yichen Li
Rebecca Saxe
Stefano Anzellotti
author_sort Yichen Li
title Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
title_short Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
title_full Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
title_fullStr Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Intersubject MVPD: Empirical comparison of fMRI denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
title_sort intersubject mvpd: empirical comparison of fmri denoising methods for connectivity analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2019-01-01
description Noise is a major challenge for the analysis of fMRI data in general and for connectivity analyses in particular. As researchers develop increasingly sophisticated tools to model statistical dependence between the fMRI signal in different brain regions, there is a risk that these models may increasingly capture artifactual relationships between regions, that are the result of noise. Thus, choosing optimal denoising methods is a crucial step to maximize the accuracy and reproducibility of connectivity models. Most comparisons between denoising methods require knowledge of the ground truth: of what is the 'real signal'. For this reason, they are usually based on simulated fMRI data. However, simulated data may not match the statistical properties of real data, limiting the generalizability of the conclusions. In this article, we propose an approach to evaluate denoising methods using real (non-simulated) fMRI data. First, we introduce an intersubject version of multivariate pattern dependence (iMVPD) that computes the statistical dependence between a brain region in one participant, and another brain region in a different participant. iMVPD has the following advantages: 1) it is multivariate, 2) it trains and tests models on independent partitions of the real fMRI data, and 3) it generates predictions that are both between subjects and between regions. Since whole-brain sources of noise are more strongly correlated within subject than between subjects, we can use the difference between standard MVPD and iMVPD as a 'discrepancy metric' to evaluate denoising techniques (where more effective techniques should yield smaller differences). As predicted, the difference is the greatest in the absence of denoising methods. Furthermore, a combination of removal of the global signal and CompCorr optimizes denoising (among the set of denoising options tested).
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222914
work_keys_str_mv AT yichenli intersubjectmvpdempiricalcomparisonoffmridenoisingmethodsforconnectivityanalysis
AT rebeccasaxe intersubjectmvpdempiricalcomparisonoffmridenoisingmethodsforconnectivityanalysis
AT stefanoanzellotti intersubjectmvpdempiricalcomparisonoffmridenoisingmethodsforconnectivityanalysis
_version_ 1714817207544840192