↓ Skip to main content

Does parametric fMRI analysis with SPM yield valid results?—An empirical study of 1484 rest datasets

Overview of attention for article published in NeuroImage, April 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
6 blogs
twitter
24 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
linkedin
1 LinkedIn user
q&a
1 Q&A thread

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
422 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Does parametric fMRI analysis with SPM yield valid results?—An empirical study of 1484 rest datasets
Published in
NeuroImage, April 2012
DOI 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.093
Pubmed ID
URN
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-76118
Authors

Anders Eklund, Mats Andersson, Camilla Josephson, Magnus Johannesson, Hans Knutsson

Abstract

The validity of parametric functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analysis has only been reported for simulated data. Recent advances in computer science and data sharing make it possible to analyze large amounts of real fMRI data. In this study, 1484 rest datasets have been analyzed in SPM8, to estimate true familywise error rates. For a familywise significance threshold of 5%, significant activity was found in 1%-70% of the 1484 rest datasets, depending on repetition time, paradigm and parameter settings. This means that parametric significance thresholds in SPM both can be conservative or very liberal. The main reason for the high familywise error rates seems to be that the global AR(1) auto correlation correction in SPM fails to model the spectra of the residuals, especially for short repetition times. The findings that are reported in this study cannot be generalized to parametric fMRI analysis in general, other software packages may give different results. By using the computational power of the graphics processing unit (GPU), the 1484 rest datasets were also analyzed with a random permutation test. Significant activity was then found in 1%-19% of the datasets. These findings speak to the need for a better model of temporal correlations in fMRI timeseries.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 24 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 422 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 26 6%
Germany 14 3%
Italy 5 1%
United Kingdom 4 <1%
Austria 3 <1%
France 3 <1%
Belgium 3 <1%
Sweden 3 <1%
Chile 2 <1%
Other 13 3%
Unknown 346 82%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 120 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 116 27%
Professor > Associate Professor 35 8%
Student > Master 33 8%
Professor 17 4%
Other 67 16%
Unknown 34 8%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 130 31%
Neuroscience 66 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 39 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 34 8%
Engineering 29 7%
Other 57 14%
Unknown 67 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 66. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 December 2023.
All research outputs
#650,161
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from NeuroImage
#314
of 12,204 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,960
of 174,012 outputs
Outputs of similar age from NeuroImage
#3
of 136 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,204 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 174,012 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 136 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.