Cited by 488Functional Brain Connectivity StudiesAdvanced Neuroimaging Techniques and ApplicationsAdvanced MRI Techniques and Applications

Partial correlation for functional brain interactivity investigation in functional MRI

Marrelec, Guillaume, Krainik, Alexandre, Duffau, Hugues, Pélégrini-Issac, Mélanie, Lehéricy, Stéphane, Doyon, Julien, Benali, Habib·2006·NeuroImage

Abstract

Examination of functional interactions through effective connectivity requires the determination of three distinct levels of information: (1) the regions involved in the process and forming the spatial support of the network, (2) the presence or absence of interactions between each pair of regions, and (3) the directionality of the existing interactions. While many methods exist to select regions (Step 1), very little is available to complete Step 2. The two main methods developed so far, structural equation modeling (SEM) and dynamical causal modeling (DCM), usually require precise prior information to be used, while such information is sometimes lacking. Assuming that Step 1 was successfully completed, we here propose a data-driven method to deal with Step 2 and extract functional interactions from fMRI datasets through partial correlations. Partial correlation is more closely related to effective connectivity than marginal correlation and provides a convenient graphical representation for functional interactions. As an instance of brain interactivity investigation, we consider how simple hand movements are processed by the bihemispheric cortical motor network. In the proposed framework, Bayesian analysis makes it possible to estimate and test the partial statistical dependencies between regions without any prior model on the underlying functional interactions. We demonstrate the interest of this approach on real data.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.12.057

Cites

67 of 67 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Correlation cannot reveal anything about causality, or even whether connectivity is direct versus indirect.

    “Furthermore, correlation cannot reveal anything about causality, or even whether connectivity is direct vs indirect [49].”

    From Functional connectomics from resting-state fMRI (2013) · cites this paper as [49]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Marrelec, G., Krainik, A., Duffau, H., Pélégrini-Issac, M., Lehéricy, S., Doyon, J., & Benali, H.
Affiliations
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (FR)
Corresponding author
Marrelec, Guillaume
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-08
Volume
32
Issue
1
Pages
228-237
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2033881971
Cited by
488
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 48 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 30 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 36 · 2014: 31 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 16
FWCI
4.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced Neuroimaging Techniques and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
Keywords
partial correlation, effective connectivity, brain network topology, functional MRI
MeSH terms
Cerebral Cortex, Humans, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Models, Neurological, Motor Cortex, Nerve Net

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