Dataset Information

Comparison of IVA and GIG-ICA in Brain Functional Network Estimation Using fMRI Data.

ABSTRACT: Spatial group independent component analysis (GICA) methods decompose multiple-subject functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data into a linear mixture of spatially independent components (ICs), some of which are subsequently characterized as brain functional networks. Group information guided independent component analysis (GIG-ICA) as a variant of GICA has been proposed to improve the accuracy of the subject-specific ICs estimation by optimizing their independence. Independent vector analysis (IVA) is another method which optimizes the independence among each subject's components and the dependence among corresponding components of different subjects. Both methods are promising in neuroimaging study and showed a better performance than the traditional GICA. However, the difference between IVA and GIG-ICA has not been well studied. A detailed comparison between them is demanded to provide guidance for functional network analyses. In this work, we employed multiple simulations to evaluate the performances of the two approaches in estimating subject-specific components and time courses under conditions of different data quality and quantity, varied number of sources generated and inaccurate number of components used in computation, as well as the presence of spatially subject-unique sources. We also compared the two methods using healthy subjects' test-retest resting-state fMRI data in terms of spatial functional networks and functional network connectivity (FNC). Results from simulations support that GIG-ICA showed better recovery accuracy of both components and time courses than IVA for those subject-common sources, and IVA outperformed GIG-ICA in component and time course estimation for the subject-unique sources. Results from real fMRI data suggest that GIG-ICA resulted in more reliable spatial functional networks and yielded higher and more robust modularity property of FNC, compared to IVA. Taken together, GIG-ICA is appropriate for estimating networks which are consistent across subjects, while IVA is able to estimate networks with great inter-subject variability or subject-unique property.

SUBMITTER: Du Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5437155 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of IVA and GIG-ICA in Brain Functional Network Estimation Using fMRI Data.

Du Yuhui Y Lin Dongdong D Yu Qingbao Q Sui Jing J Chen Jiayu J Rachakonda Srinivas S Adali Tulay T Calhoun Vince D VD

Frontiers in neuroscience 20170519

Spatial group independent component analysis (GICA) methods decompose multiple-subject functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data into a linear mixture of spatially independent components (ICs), some of which are subsequently characterized as brain functional networks. Group information guided independent component analysis (GIG-ICA) as a variant of GICA has been proposed to improve the accuracy of the subject-specific ICs estimation by optimizing their independence. Independent vector an ...[more]

PMID: 28579940

Similar Datasets

Project description:Different strategies have been developed using Independent Component Analysis (ICA) to automatically de-noise fMRI data, either focusing on removing only certain components (e.g. motion-ICA-AROMA, Pruim et al., 2015a) or using more complex classifiers to remove multiple types of noise components (e.g. FIX, Salimi-Khorshidi et al., 2014 Griffanti et al., 2014). However, denoising data obtained in an acute setting might prove challenging: the presence of multiple noise sources may not allow focused strategies to clean the data enough and the heterogeneity in the data may be so great to critically undermine complex approaches. The purpose of this study was to explore what automated ICA based approach would better cope with these limitations when cleaning fMRI data obtained from acute stroke patients. The performance of a focused classifier (ICA-AROMA) and a complex classifier (FIX) approaches were compared using data obtained from twenty consecutive acute lacunar stroke patients using metrics determining RSN identification, RSN reproducibility, changes in the BOLD variance, differences in the estimation of functional connectivity and loss of temporal degrees of freedom. The use of generic-trained FIX resulted in misclassification of components and significant loss of signal (< 80%), and was not explored further. Both ICA-AROMA and patient-trained FIX based denoising approaches resulted in significantly improved RSN reproducibility (p < 0.001), localized reduction in BOLD variance consistent with noise removal, and significant changes in functional connectivity (p < 0.001). Patient-trained FIX resulted in higher RSN identifiability (p < 0.001) and wider changes both in the BOLD variance and in functional connectivity compared to ICA-AROMA. The success of ICA-AROMA suggests that by focusing on selected components the full automation can deliver meaningful data for analysis even in population with multiple sources of noise. However, the time invested to train FIX with appropriate patient data proved valuable, particularly in improving the signal-to-noise ratio.

Dataset Information

Comparison of IVA and GIG-ICA in Brain Functional Network Estimation Using fMRI Data.

Publications

Comparison of IVA and GIG-ICA in Brain Functional Network Estimation Using fMRI Data.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets