|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Free Newsletters
Archive
My Subscriptions

News by Subject
News by Disease
News by Date
PLoS
Search News
Post Your News
JoVE

Job Seeker Login
Most Recent Jobs
Browse Biotech Jobs
Search Jobs
Post Resume
Career Fairs
Career Resources
For Employers

Regional News
US & Canada
Biotech Bay
Biotech Beach
Genetown
Pharm Country
BioCapital
BioMidwest
Bio NC
BioForest
Southern Pharm
BioCanada East
US Device
Europe
Asia


Market Summary
News
IPOs

Company Profiles

Companies
Events

Research Store

Biotech Events
Post an Event

Real Estate
Business Opportunities
|
|
|
|
|
PLoS By Category | Recent
PLoS Articles
|
|
Neuroscience - Pediatrics and Child Health - Radiology and Medical Imaging
|
An Iterative Jackknife Approach for Assessing Reliability and Power of fMRI Group Analyses
Published:
Tuesday, April 17, 2012
Author:
Marko Wilke
by Marko Wilke
For functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) group activation maps, so-called second-level random effect approaches are commonly used, which are intended to be generalizable to the population as a whole. However, reliability of a certain activation focus as a function of group composition or group size cannot directly be deduced from such maps. This question is of particular relevance when examining smaller groups (<20–27 subjects). The approach presented here tries to address this issue by iteratively excluding each subject from a group study and presenting the overlap of the resulting (reduced) second-level maps in a group percent overlap map. This allows to judge where activation is reliable even upon excluding one, two, or three (or more) subjects, thereby also demonstrating the inherent variability that is still present in second-level analyses. Moreover, when progressively decreasing group size, foci of activation will become smaller and/or disappear; hence, the group size at which a given activation disappears can be considered to reflect the power necessary to detect this particular activation. Systematically exploiting this effect allows to rank clusters according to their observable effect size. The approach is tested using different scenarios from a recent fMRI study (children performing a “dual-use” fMRI task, n?=?39), and the implications of this approach are discussed.
More...
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|