The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Statistical methods of estimation and inference for functional MR image analysis
Abstract
Two questions arising In the analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) data acquired during periodic sensory stimulation are: i) how to measure the experimentally determined effect in fMRI time series; and ii) how to decide whether an apparent effect is significant Our approach is first to fit a time series regression model, including sine and cosine terms at the (fundamental) frequency of experimental stimulation, by pseudogeneralized least squares (PGLS) at each pixel of an image. Sinusoidal modeling takes account of locally variable hemodynamic delay and dispersion, and PGLS fitting corrects for residual or endogenous autocorrelation in fMRI time series, to yield best unbiased estimates of the amplitudes of the sine and cosine terms at fundamental frequency; from these parameters the authors derive estimates of experimentally determined power and its standard error. Randomization testing is then used to create inferential brain activation maps (BAMs) of pixels significantly activated by the experimental stimulus. The methods are illustrated by application to data acquired from normal human subjects during periodic visual and auditory stimulation.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Brain magnetic resonance imaging with contrast dependent on blood oxygenation.
Ogawa, S., Lee, T. M., Kay, A. R., & Tank, D. W. (1990) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.87.24.9868 · Cited by 6,483
Cited by
Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG- and MEG-data
Maris, E., & Oostenveld, R. (2007) · Journal of Neuroscience Methods · doi:10.1016/j.jneumeth.2007.03.024 · Cited by 8,496
Nonparametric permutation tests for functional neuroimaging: A primer with examples
Nichols, T. E., & Holmes, A. P. (2002) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.1058 · Cited by 6,256
Permutation inference for the general linear model
Winkler, A. M., Ridgway, G. R., Webster, M. A., Smith, S. M., & Nichols, T. E. (2014) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.01.060 · Cited by 3,563
Investigations into resting-state connectivity using independent component analysis
Beckmann, C. F., DeLuca, M., Devlin, J. T., & Smith, S. M. (2005) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2005.1634 · Cited by 3,398
A specific neural substrate for perceiving facial expressions of disgust
Phillips, M. L., Young, A. W., Senior, C., Brammer, M., Andrew, C., Calder, A. J., Bullmore, E. T., Perrett, D. I., Rowland, D., Williams, S. C. R., et al. (1997) · Nature · doi:10.1038/39051 · Cited by 1,609
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Bullmore, E., Brammer, M., Williams, S. C. R., Rabe‐Hesketh, S., Janot, N., David, A., Mellers, J., Howard, R., & Sham, P.
- Venue
- Magnetic Resonance in Medicine
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1996-02
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 261-277
- ISSN
- 0740-3194 (ISSN-L)
- 1522-2594
- OpenAlex
- W2124187669
- Cited by
- 683
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 38.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.