Resting-State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (RS-FMRI) holds the promise of revealing brain functional connectivity without requiring specific tasks targeting particular brain systems. RS-FMRI is being used to find differences between populations even when a specific candidate target for traditional inferences is lacking. However, the problem with RS-FMRI is a lacking definition of what constitutes noise and signal. RS-FMRI is easy to acquire but not to analyze or draw inferences from. In this commentary we discuss a problem that is still treated lightly despite its significant impact on RS-FMRI inferences: Global Signal Regression (GSReg) – the practice of projecting out signal averaged over the entire brain – can change resting state correlations in ways that dramatically alter correlation patterns and hence conclusions about brain functional connectedness. Although Murphy et al. in 2009 demonstrated GSReg negatively biases correlations, the approach remains in wide use. We revisit this issue to argue the problem with GSReg is more than negative bias or the interpretability of negative correlations. Its usage can fundamentally alter inter-regional correlations within a group, or their differences between groups. We used an illustrative model to clearly convey our objections and derived equations formalizing our conclusions. We hope this creates a clear context in which counterarguments can be made. We conclude that GSReg should not be used when studying RS-FMRI because GSReg biases correlations differently in different regions depending on the underlying true inter-regional correlation structure. GSReg can alter local and long-range correlations, potentially spreading underlying group differences to regions that may never have had any. Conclusions also apply to substitutions of GSReg for denoising with decompositions of signals aggregated over the network’s regions to the extent they cannot separate signals of interest from noise. We touch on the need for careful accounting of nuisance parameters when making group comparisons of correlation maps.

Many components of resting-state (RS) FMRI show non-random structure that has little to do with neural connectivity but can covary over multiple brain structures. Some of these signals originate in physiology and others are hardware-related. One artifact discussed herein may be caused by defects in the receive coil array or the RF amplifiers powering it. During a scan, this artifact results in small image intensity shifts in parts of the brain imaged by the affected array components. These shifts introduce artifactual correlations in RS time series on the spatial scale of the coil's sensitivity profile, and can markedly bias RS connectivity results. We show that such a transient artifact can be substantially removed from RS time series by using locally formed regressors from white matter tissue. This is particularly important in arrays with larger numbers of coils, which may generate smaller artifact zones. In such a case, brain-wide average noise estimates would fail to capture the artifact. We also examine the anatomical structure of artifactual variance in RS FMRI time series, by identifying sources that contribute to these signals and where in the brain are they manifested. We consider current methods for reducing confounding sources (or noises) and their effects on connectivity maps, and offer an improved approach (ANATICOR) that can also reduce hardware artifacts. The methods described herein are currently available with AFNI, in addition to tools for rapid, interactive generation of seed based correlation maps at single-subject and group levels.

Artifactual sources of resting-state (RS) FMRI can originate from head motion, physiology, and hardware. Of these sources, motion has received considerable attention and was found to induce corrupting effects by differentially biasing correlations between regions depending on their distance. Numerous corrective approaches have relied on the identification and censoring of high-motion time points and the use of the brain-wide average time series as a nuisance regressor to which the data are orthogonalized (Global Signal Regression, GSReg). We first replicate the previously reported head-motion bias on correlation coefficients using data generously contributed by Power et al. (2012). We then show that while motion can be the source of artifact in correlations, the distance-dependent bias—taken to be a manifestation of the motion effect on correlation—is exacerbated by the use of GSReg. Put differently, correlation estimates obtained after GSReg are more susceptible to the presence of motion and by extension to the levels of censoring. More generally, the effect of motion on correlation estimates depends on the preprocessing steps leading to the correlation estimate, with certain approaches performing markedly worse than others. For this purpose, we consider various models for RS FMRI preprocessing and show that WMeLOCAL, as subset of the ANATICOR discussed by Jo et al. (2010), denoising approach results in minimal sensitivity to motion and reduces by extension the dependence of correlation results on censoring.

Noninvasive parcellation of the human cerebral cortex is an important goal for understanding and examining brain functions. Recently, the patterns of anatomical connections using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) have been used to parcellate brain regions. Here, we present a noninvasive parcellation approach that uses “functional fingerprints” obtained by correlation measures on resting-state functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) data to parcellate brain regions. In other terms, brain regions are parcellated based on the similarity of their connection – as reflected by correlation during resting-state – to the whole brain. The proposed method was used to parcellate the medial frontal cortex (MFC) into supplementary motor areas (SMA) and pre-SMA subregions. In agreement with anatomical landmark-based parcellation, we find that functional fingerprint clustering of the MFC results in anterior and posterior clusters. The probabilistic maps from 12 subjects showed that the anterior cluster is mainly located rostral to the vertical commissure anterior (VCA) line, whereas the posterior cluster is mainly located caudal to VCA line, suggesting the homologues of pre-SMA and SMA. The functional connections from the putative pre-SMA cluster were connected to brain regions which are responsible for complex/cognitive motor control, whereas those from the putative SMA cluster were connected to brain regions which are related to the simple motor control. These findings demonstrate the feasibility of the functional connectivity-based parcellation of the human cerebral cortex using resting state fMRI.

The hemispheric lateralization of certain faculties in the human brain has long been held to be beneficial for functioning. However, quantitative relationships between the degree of lateralization in particular brain regions and the level of functioning have yet to be established. Here we demonstrate that two distinct forms of functional lateralization are present in the left vs. the right cerebral hemisphere, with the left hemisphere showing a preference to interact more exclusively with itself, particularly for cortical regions involved in language and fine motor coordination. In contrast, righthemisphere cortical regions involved in visuospatial and attentional processing interact in a more integrative fashion with both hemispheres. The degree of lateralization present in these distinct systems selectively predicted behavioral measures of verbal and visuospatial ability, providing direct evidence that lateralization is associated with enhanced cognitive ability.W hen considering the macroscopic functional organization of the human brain, it is a basic fact that particular capacities such as language, visuospatial attention, and hand preference in motor coordination are relatively lateralized to one of the two cerebral hemispheres (1, 2). Neuropsychological and neuroimaging studies have revealed a strong bias toward lefthemisphere representation of language and fine motor control of the hands (3, 4), with a well-documented association between handedness and language lateralization that is most pronounced in right-handed males (5). In contrast, visuospatial attentional abilities are represented more strongly in the right hemisphere, with right-sided brain damage being more likely to produce hemispatial attentional neglect (6). Although the mechanisms underlying functional lateralization are unknown, theoretical proposals have appealed to the computational benefits of functional specialization (7-9), with distinct functions and a division of labor between the hemispheres that improves overall cognitive ability and performance.If functional lateralization is truly beneficial, a quantitative relationship should exist between the strength of lateralization and the level of cognitive ability. Indeed, relative hand skill, a behavioral marker of the lateralization of fine motor control, predicts verbal and nonverbal ability levels in both left-and righthanded individuals, with deficits observed in individuals with equal motor skills in the two hands (10). However, investigation of the brain bases of these relationships has been limited by several factors. A comprehensive evaluation of lateralization over the entire cortex requires establishing homotopic locations in the two hemispheres with high spatial precision, an alignment that is complicated by the presence of variable gyral folding patterns (11). Detailed hemispheric alignment methods by gyral and sulcal landmarks on the unfolded cortical surface have only recently been developed (12, 13). Previous neuroimaging studies of functional lateralization have also cons...

We have previously argued from a theoretical basis that the standard practice of regression of the Global Signal from the fMRI time series in functional connectivity studies is ill advised, particularly when comparing groups of participants. Here, we demonstrate in resting-state data from participants with an Autism Spectrum Disorder and matched controls that these concerns are also well founded in real data. Using the prior theoretical work to formulate predictions, we show: (1) rather than simply altering the mean or range of correlation values amongst pairs of brain regions, Global Signal Regression systematically alters the rank ordering of values in addition to introducing negative values, (2) it leads to a reversal in the direction of group correlation differences relative to other preprocessing approaches, with a higher incidence of both long-range and local correlation differences that favor the Autism Spectrum Disorder group, (3) the strongest group differences under other preprocessing approaches are the ones most altered by Global Signal Regression, and (4) locations showing group differences no longer agree with those showing correlations with behavioral symptoms within the Autism Spectrum Disorder group. The correlation matrices of both participant groups under Global Signal Regression were well predicted by our previous mathematical analyses, demonstrating that there is nothing mysterious about these results. Finally, when independent physiological nuisance measures are lacking, we provide a simple alternative approach for assessing and lessening the influence of global correlations on group comparisons that replicates our previous findings. While this alternative performs less well for symptom correlations than our favored preprocessing approach that includes removal of independent physiological measures, it is preferable to the use of Global Signal Regression, which prevents unequivocal conclusions about the direction or location of group differences.

A deficit in cognitive flexibility is acknowledged as a cognitive trait for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, no investigations to date have used a cognitive activation paradigm to specify the neural correlates of this deficit in OCD. The objective of this study was to clarify how abnormal brain activities relate to cognitive inflexibility in OCD, using a task-switching paradigm. A task-switching paradigm which has two kinds of task-set was applied to 21 patients with OCD and 21 healthy subjects of matching age, IQ and sex, during an event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging experiment. Compared with the healthy subjects, patients with OCD exhibited a significantly higher error rate in task-switch trials (P < 0.05). Healthy controls showed significant activation in various areas, including dorsal frontal-striatal regions, during task-switching, whereas patients with OCD showed no activation in these areas. Significant differences were also observed in the dorsal frontal-striatal regions and ventromedial prefrontal and right orbitofrontal cortexes between patients with OCD and healthy controls. Correlation analysis indicated that the activations of orbitofrontal cortex were related with the performance in both groups and also with the activation of anterior cingulate cortex in the OCD group. These findings replicate previous studies of cognitive inflexibility in OCD and provide neural correlates related to a task-switching deficit in OCD. The results suggest that impaired task-switching ability in OCD patients might be associated with an imbalance in brain activation between dorsal and ventral frontal-striatal circuits.

Brain function in "resting" state has been extensively studied with functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI). However, drawing valid inferences, particularly for group comparisons, is fraught with pitfalls. Differing levels of brain-wide correlations can confound group comparisons. Global signal regression (GSReg) attempts to reduce this confound and is commonly used, even though it differentially biases correlations over brain regions, potentially leading to false group differences. We propose to use average brain-wide correlations as a measure of global correlation (GCOR), and examine the circumstances under which it can be used to identify or correct for differences in global fluctuations. In the process, we show the bias induced by GSReg to be a function only of the data's covariance matrix, and use simulations to compare corrections with GCOR as covariate to GSReg under various scenarios. We find that unlike GSReg, GCOR is a conservative approach that can reduce global variations, while avoiding the introduction of false significant differences, as GSReg can. However, as with GSReg, one cannot escape the interaction effect between the grouping variable and GCOR covariate on effect size. While GCOR is a complementary measure for resting state-FMRI applicable to legacy data, it is a lesser substitute for proper level-I denoising. We also assess the applicability of GCOR to empirical data with motion-based subject grouping and compare group differences to those using GSReg. We find that, while GCOR reduced correlation differences between high and low movers, it is doubtful that motion was the sole driver behind the differences in the first place.