↓ Skip to main content

Using Dual Regression to Investigate Network Shape and Amplitude in Functional Connectivity Analyses

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
367 Mendeley
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
Using Dual Regression to Investigate Network Shape and Amplitude in Functional Connectivity Analyses
Published in
Frontiers in Neuroscience, March 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnins.2017.00115
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lisa D. Nickerson, Stephen M. Smith, Döst Öngür, Christian F. Beckmann

Abstract

Independent Component Analysis (ICA) is one of the most popular techniques for the analysis of resting state FMRI data because it has several advantageous properties when compared with other techniques. Most notably, in contrast to a conventional seed-based correlation analysis, it is model-free and multivariate, thus switching the focus from evaluating the functional connectivity of single brain regions identified a priori to evaluating brain connectivity in terms of all brain resting state networks (RSNs) that simultaneously engage in oscillatory activity. Furthermore, typical seed-based analysis characterizes RSNs in terms of spatially distributed patterns of correlation (typically by means of simple Pearson's coefficients) and thereby confounds together amplitude information of oscillatory activity and noise. ICA and other regression techniques, on the other hand, retain magnitude information and therefore can be sensitive to both changes in the spatially distributed nature of correlations (differences in the spatial pattern or "shape") as well as the amplitude of the network activity. Furthermore, motion can mimic amplitude effects so it is crucial to use a technique that retains such information to ensure that connectivity differences are accurately localized. In this work, we investigate the dual regression approach that is frequently applied with group ICA to assess group differences in resting state functional connectivity of brain networks. We show how ignoring amplitude effects and how excessive motion corrupts connectivity maps and results in spurious connectivity differences. We also show how to implement the dual regression to retain amplitude information and how to use dual regression outputs to identify potential motion effects. Two key findings are that using a technique that retains magnitude information, e.g., dual regression, and using strict motion criteria are crucial for controlling both network amplitude and motion-related amplitude effects, respectively, in resting state connectivity analyses. We illustrate these concepts using realistic simulated resting state FMRI data and in vivo data acquired in healthy subjects and patients with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 367 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 367 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 91 25%
Researcher 61 17%
Student > Master 46 13%
Student > Bachelor 28 8%
Student > Postgraduate 16 4%
Other 47 13%
Unknown 78 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 108 29%
Psychology 47 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 9%
Engineering 13 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 3%
Other 37 10%
Unknown 117 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 13 February 2021.
All research outputs
#17,289,387
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#8,070
of 11,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#207,665
of 322,532 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neuroscience
#153
of 217 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11,542 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 322,532 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 217 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.