2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0730-725x(00)00190-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Combining independent component analysis and correlation analysis to probe interregional connectivity in fMRI task activation datasets

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

8
133
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 173 publications
(142 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
8
133
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In an early positron emission tomography (PET) study by Paulesu et al (Paulesu et al, 1996) investigating adults with and without dyslexia, the group differences in task dependent activation patterns were interpreted to suggest that good reading required cooperation and connections among brain regions, and that dyslexia resulted from a disconnection among regions. A popular method for the in vivo examination of the cooperation between brain regions is called functional connectivity MRI (fcMRI), which examines the temporal coherence in which brain areas are engaged (Biswal et al, 1995;Cordes et al, 2000; Friston, 1994;Lowe et al, 1998). This data-driven analysis allows the identification of interregional correlations (with consistent regression coefficients across subjects) in low-frequency (<0.1 Hz) spontaneous BOLD fluctuations in the brain which cannot be attributed to the experimental paradigm (Arfanakis et al, 2000;Biswal et al, 1995;Cordes et al, 2000; Fox and Raichle, 2007; Friston, 1995; Horwitz et al, 1992;Lowe et al, 1998;Xiong et al, 1999).…”
Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In an early positron emission tomography (PET) study by Paulesu et al (Paulesu et al, 1996) investigating adults with and without dyslexia, the group differences in task dependent activation patterns were interpreted to suggest that good reading required cooperation and connections among brain regions, and that dyslexia resulted from a disconnection among regions. A popular method for the in vivo examination of the cooperation between brain regions is called functional connectivity MRI (fcMRI), which examines the temporal coherence in which brain areas are engaged (Biswal et al, 1995;Cordes et al, 2000; Friston, 1994;Lowe et al, 1998). This data-driven analysis allows the identification of interregional correlations (with consistent regression coefficients across subjects) in low-frequency (<0.1 Hz) spontaneous BOLD fluctuations in the brain which cannot be attributed to the experimental paradigm (Arfanakis et al, 2000;Biswal et al, 1995;Cordes et al, 2000; Fox and Raichle, 2007; Friston, 1995; Horwitz et al, 1992;Lowe et al, 1998;Xiong et al, 1999).…”
Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A popular method for the in vivo examination of the cooperation between brain regions is called functional connectivity MRI (fcMRI), which examines the temporal coherence in which brain areas are engaged (Biswal et al, 1995;Cordes et al, 2000; Friston, 1994;Lowe et al, 1998). This data-driven analysis allows the identification of interregional correlations (with consistent regression coefficients across subjects) in low-frequency (<0.1 Hz) spontaneous BOLD fluctuations in the brain which cannot be attributed to the experimental paradigm (Arfanakis et al, 2000;Biswal et al, 1995;Cordes et al, 2000; Fox and Raichle, 2007; Friston, 1995; Horwitz et al, 1992;Lowe et al, 1998;Xiong et al, 1999). Since this technique involves correlating signal changes in a seed region with signal changes in other parts of the brain, it can reveal functional interactions between brain areas (Friston et al, 1996).…”
Section: Accepted M Manuscriptmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…As a result, many methods are available to this end, including activation maps (Huettel et al, 2004), as well as methods deriving from functional connectivity, such as principal or independent component analysis (Friston et al, 1993b;Arfanakis et al, 2000), or correlation maps (Biswal et al, 1995(Biswal et al, , 1997Xiong et al, 1999). In our study, we assume that this step has been successfully completed, providing us with a set of regions and corresponding signals.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To date, methods for estimating functional and effective connectivity from brain imaging data can generally be classified into two types: Those that look for groupings of regions that work together without regard to how they are connected Arfanakis et al, 2000;Calhoun et al, 2001;Calhoun et al, 2005), and those that rely on an underlying model of connection patterns among a specific set of regions and connections that are hypothesized to mediate the task of interest (McIntosh & Gonzalez-Lima, 1994;Friston et al, 2003). While the former are purely data-driven, the latter methods are based on hypotheses about specific networks that are important in mediating the task under consideration, and the goal is to find connection strengths that satisfy the constraints of the imaging data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%