73
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      On the Plurality of (Methodological) Worlds: Estimating the Analytic Flexibility of fMRI Experiments

      research-article
      1
      Frontiers in Neuroscience
      Frontiers Media S.A.
      fMRI, data analysis, analysis flexibility, selective reporting, false positive results

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          How likely are published findings in the functional neuroimaging literature to be false? According to a recent mathematical model, the potential for false positives increases with the flexibility of analysis methods. Functional MRI (fMRI) experiments can be analyzed using a large number of commonly used tools, with little consensus on how, when, or whether to apply each one. This situation may lead to substantial variability in analysis outcomes. Thus, the present study sought to estimate the flexibility of neuroimaging analysis by submitting a single event-related fMRI experiment to a large number of unique analysis procedures. Ten analysis steps for which multiple strategies appear in the literature were identified, and two to four strategies were enumerated for each step. Considering all possible combinations of these strategies yielded 6,912 unique analysis pipelines. Activation maps from each pipeline were corrected for multiple comparisons using five thresholding approaches, yielding 34,560 significance maps. While some outcomes were relatively consistent across pipelines, others showed substantial methods-related variability in activation strength, location, and extent. Some analysis decisions contributed to this variability more than others, and different decisions were associated with distinct patterns of variability across the brain. Qualitative outcomes also varied with analysis parameters: many contrasts yielded significant activation under some pipelines but not others. Altogether, these results reveal considerable flexibility in the analysis of fMRI experiments. This observation, when combined with mathematical simulations linking analytic flexibility with elevated false positive rates, suggests that false positive results may be more prevalent than expected in the literature. This risk of inflated false positive rates may be mitigated by constraining the flexibility of analytic choices or by abstaining from selective analysis reporting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Automated anatomical labeling of activations in SPM using a macroscopic anatomical parcellation of the MNI MRI single-subject brain.

          An anatomical parcellation of the spatially normalized single-subject high-resolution T1 volume provided by the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI) (D. L. Collins et al., 1998, Trans. Med. Imag. 17, 463-468) was performed. The MNI single-subject main sulci were first delineated and further used as landmarks for the 3D definition of 45 anatomical volumes of interest (AVOI) in each hemisphere. This procedure was performed using a dedicated software which allowed a 3D following of the sulci course on the edited brain. Regions of interest were then drawn manually with the same software every 2 mm on the axial slices of the high-resolution MNI single subject. The 90 AVOI were reconstructed and assigned a label. Using this parcellation method, three procedures to perform the automated anatomical labeling of functional studies are proposed: (1) labeling of an extremum defined by a set of coordinates, (2) percentage of voxels belonging to each of the AVOI intersected by a sphere centered by a set of coordinates, and (3) percentage of voxels belonging to each of the AVOI intersected by an activated cluster. An interface with the Statistical Parametric Mapping package (SPM, J. Ashburner and K. J. Friston, 1999, Hum. Brain Mapp. 7, 254-266) is provided as a freeware to researchers of the neuroimaging community. We believe that this tool is an improvement for the macroscopical labeling of activated area compared to labeling assessed using the Talairach atlas brain in which deformations are well known. However, this tool does not alleviate the need for more sophisticated labeling strategies based on anatomical or cytoarchitectonic probabilistic maps.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Systematic Review of the Empirical Evidence of Study Publication Bias and Outcome Reporting Bias

            Background The increased use of meta-analysis in systematic reviews of healthcare interventions has highlighted several types of bias that can arise during the completion of a randomised controlled trial. Study publication bias has been recognised as a potential threat to the validity of meta-analysis and can make the readily available evidence unreliable for decision making. Until recently, outcome reporting bias has received less attention. Methodology/Principal Findings We review and summarise the evidence from a series of cohort studies that have assessed study publication bias and outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials. Sixteen studies were eligible of which only two followed the cohort all the way through from protocol approval to information regarding publication of outcomes. Eleven of the studies investigated study publication bias and five investigated outcome reporting bias. Three studies have found that statistically significant outcomes had a higher odds of being fully reported compared to non-significant outcomes (range of odds ratios: 2.2 to 4.7). In comparing trial publications to protocols, we found that 40–62% of studies had at least one primary outcome that was changed, introduced, or omitted. We decided not to undertake meta-analysis due to the differences between studies. Conclusions Recent work provides direct empirical evidence for the existence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. There is strong evidence of an association between significant results and publication; studies that report positive or significant results are more likely to be published and outcomes that are statistically significant have higher odds of being fully reported. Publications have been found to be inconsistent with their protocols. Researchers need to be aware of the problems of both types of bias and efforts should be concentrated on improving the reporting of trials.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Correlations and anticorrelations in resting-state functional connectivity MRI: a quantitative comparison of preprocessing strategies.

              Resting-state data sets contain coherent fluctuations unrelated to neural processes originating from residual motion artefacts, respiration and cardiac action. Such confounding effects may introduce correlations and cause an overestimation of functional connectivity strengths. In this study we applied several multidimensional linear regression approaches to remove artificial coherencies and examined the impact of preprocessing on sensitivity and specificity of functional connectivity results in simulated data and resting-state data sets from 40 subjects. Furthermore, we aimed at clarifying possible causes of anticorrelations and test the hypothesis that anticorrelations are introduced via certain preprocessing approaches, with particular focus on the effects of regression against the global signal. Our results show that preprocessing in general greatly increased connection specificity, in particular correction for global signal fluctuations almost doubled connection specificity. However, widespread anticorrelated networks were only found when regression against the global signal was applied. Results in simulated data sets compared with result of human data strongly suggest that anticorrelations are indeed introduced by global signal regression and should therefore be interpreted very carefully. In addition, global signal regression may also reduce the sensitivity for detecting true correlations, i.e. increase the number of false negatives. Concluding from our results we suggest that is highly recommended to apply correction against realignment parameters, white matter and ventricular time courses, as well as the global signal to maximize the specificity of positive resting-state correlations.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Front Neurosci
                Front. Neurosci.
                Frontiers in Neuroscience
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1662-4548
                1662-453X
                11 October 2012
                2012
                : 6
                : 149
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Department of Psychology, University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI, USA
                Author notes

                Edited by: Satrajit S. Ghosh, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA

                Reviewed by: Jonathan E. Peelle, Washington University, USA; Eugene Duff, University of Oxford, UK

                *Correspondence: Joshua Carp, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, 530 Church Street, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA. e-mail: jmcarp@ 123456umich.edu

                This article was submitted to Frontiers in Brain Imaging Methods, a specialty of Frontiers in Neuroscience.

                Article
                10.3389/fnins.2012.00149
                3468892
                23087605
                1340f5a5-5341-453b-b4cf-3a83402e883c
                Copyright © 2012 Carp.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc.

                History
                : 06 August 2012
                : 18 September 2012
                Page count
                Figures: 7, Tables: 3, Equations: 0, References: 45, Pages: 13, Words: 8783
                Categories
                Neuroscience
                Original Research

                Neurosciences
                fmri,false positive results,analysis flexibility,selective reporting,data analysis
                Neurosciences
                fmri, false positive results, analysis flexibility, selective reporting, data analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article