2011
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.a2733
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Functional Connectivity during Resting-State Functional MR Imaging: Study of the Correspondence between Independent Component Analysis and Region-of-Interest−Based Methods

Abstract: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:The connectivity across brain regions can be evaluated through fMRI either by using ICA or by means of correlation analysis of time courses measured in predefined ROIs. The purpose of this study was to investigate quantitatively the correspondence between the connectivity information provided by the 2 techniques.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

3
91
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 106 publications
(94 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
3
91
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We considered ICA more suitable for our research question than seed-based ROI connectivity as we were interested in intrinsic networks that can be identified in a model-free, data-driven way. Most importantly, Rosazza et al (2011) showed that the largest differences in results between ICA and ROI analysis were observed for long range connections, which are the focus of our study. Moreover, ICA tends to separate signal of no interest from signal of interest (brain activation) and may give a better representation of brain activation than the raw MRI signal and contain less noise (Van de Ven et al, 2004;Fox and Raichle, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…We considered ICA more suitable for our research question than seed-based ROI connectivity as we were interested in intrinsic networks that can be identified in a model-free, data-driven way. Most importantly, Rosazza et al (2011) showed that the largest differences in results between ICA and ROI analysis were observed for long range connections, which are the focus of our study. Moreover, ICA tends to separate signal of no interest from signal of interest (brain activation) and may give a better representation of brain activation than the raw MRI signal and contain less noise (Van de Ven et al, 2004;Fox and Raichle, 2007).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Stability of the components, i.e. investigating whether a component has the tendency to split or merge with another component (Rosazza et al, 2011), was validated by running the ICASSO toolbox implemented in GIFT using twenty iterations with both random iterations and bootstrapping (Himberg and Hyvärinen, 2003;Himberg et al, 2004).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Unlike ROI analyses which rely on prior anatomic hypotheses, ICA is a data‐driven analysis. There are strengths and weaknesses inherent in both methods (Rosazza et al., 2012); therefore, future studies may wish to include network homogeneity and seed‐based functional connectivity analyses as alternate methods of examining network connectivity. In addition, we employed a 4‐minute resting state scan, which is sufficient to reliably estimate network connectivity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We isolated 20 ICs using the Infomax algorithm in GIFT, as this number of components shows the strongest correspondence with region‐of‐interest (ROI) data (Rosazza, Minati, Ghielmetti., Mandelli, & Bruzzone, 2012), and repeated the estimation 20 times using the ICASSO method (Himberg, Hyvärinen, & Esposito, 2004) to enhance component reliability. Single subject spatial maps and time courses for each component were back‐reconstructed for each participant and converted to z ‐scores to indicate the strength of each voxel's contribution to the component (Erhardt et al., 2011).…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%