Background
Using a standard space brain template is an efficient way of
determining region-of-interest (ROI) boundaries for functional magnetic
resonance imaging (fMRI) data analyses. However, ROIs based on landmarks on
subject-specific (i.e., native space) brain surfaces are anatomically
accurate and probably best reflect the regional blood oxygen level dependent
(BOLD) response for the individual. Unfortunately, accurate native space
ROIs are often time-intensive to delineate even when using automated
methods.
New Method
We compared analyses of group differences when using standard versus
native space ROIs using both volume and surface-based analyses. Collegiate
and military-veteran participants completed a button press task and a
digit-symbol verification task during fMRI acquisition. Data were analyzed
within ROIs representing left and right motor and prefrontal cortices, in
native and standard space. Volume and surface-based analysis results were
also compared using both functional (i.e., percent signal change) and
structural (i.e., voxel or node count) approaches.
Results and Comparison with Existing Method(s)
Results suggest that transformation into standard space can affect
the outcome of structural and functional analyses (inflating/minimizing
differences, based on cortical geography), and these transformations can
affect conclusions regarding group differences with volumetric data.
Conclusions
Caution is advised when applying standard space ROIs to volumetric
fMRI data. However, volumetric analyses show group differences and are
appropriate in circumstances when time is limited. Surface-based analyses
using functional ROIs generated the greatest group differences and were less
susceptible to differences between native and standard space. We conclude
that surface-based analyses are preferable with adequate time and computing
resources.