Cited by 1,684Advanced MRI Techniques and ApplicationsFunctional Brain Connectivity StudiesImage and Signal Denoising Methods

ICA-AROMA: A robust ICA-based strategy for removing motion artifacts from fMRI data

Open access
Pruim, Raimon H.R., Mennes, Maarten, van Rooij, Daan, Llera, Alberto, Buitelaar, Jan K., Beckmann, Christian F.·2015·NeuroImage

Abstract

Head motion during functional MRI (fMRI) scanning can induce spurious findings and/or harm detection of true effects. Solutions have been proposed, including deleting ('scrubbing') or regressing out ('spike regression') motion volumes from fMRI time-series. These strategies remove motion-induced signal variations at the cost of destroying the autocorrelation structure of the fMRI time-series and reducing temporal degrees of freedom. ICA-based fMRI denoising strategies overcome these drawbacks but typically require re-training of a classifier, needing manual labeling of derived components (e.g. ICA-FIX; Salimi-Khorshidi et al. (2014)). Here, we propose an ICA-based strategy for Automatic Removal of Motion Artifacts (ICA-AROMA) that uses a small (n=4), but robust set of theoretically motivated temporal and spatial features. Our strategy does not require classifier re-training, retains the data's autocorrelation structure and largely preserves temporal degrees of freedom. We describe ICA-AROMA, its implementation, and initial validation. ICA-AROMA identified motion components with high accuracy and robustness as illustrated by leave-N-out cross-validation. We additionally validated ICA-AROMA in resting-state (100 participants) and task-based fMRI data (118 participants). Our approach removed (motion-related) spurious noise from both rfMRI and task-based fMRI data to larger extent than regression using 24 motion parameters or spike regression. Furthermore, ICA-AROMA increased sensitivity to group-level activation. Our results show that ICA-AROMA effectively reduces motion-induced signal variations in fMRI data, is applicable across datasets without requiring classifier re-training, and preserves the temporal characteristics of the fMRI data.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2015.02.064

Cites

57 of 57 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Andersson, J.L., Jenkinson, M., Smith, S., 2007. Non-linear registration, aka spatial normalisation. Technical Report. FMRIB Centre, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pruim, R. H. R., Mennes, M., van Rooij, D., Llera, A., Buitelaar, J. K., & Beckmann, C. F.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Corresponding author
Pruim, Raimon H.R.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-05
Volume
112
Pages
267-277
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2047453615
Cited by
1,684
References
57
Citations by year
2026: 154 · 2025: 201 · 2024: 185 · 2023: 203 · 2022: 197 · 2021: 207 · 2020: 193 · 2019: 126 · 2018: 94 · 2017: 66 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 8
FWCI
58.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Wellcome Trust (FP7/2007–2013, 433-09-242, 098369/Z/12/Z, 098369)
  • European Commission (EU-FP7, 2007–2013, FP7 2007-2013, 278948, FP7/2007, 327340)
  • ZonMw (60-60600-97-193, 056-13-015, 433-09-242)
  • Radboud Universiteit
  • Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (433-09-242, FP7/2007-2013, 278948, 056-13-015)
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (433‐09‐242, 175.010.2007.010, NWO-Vidi 864.12.003, FP7 2007-2013, 05613015, 864.12.003, NWO-Vidi 864-12, 60-60600-97-193)
  • Accare
  • Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen
  • Radboud Universitair Medisch Centrum
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Advanced MRI Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Functional Brain Connectivity Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Image and Signal Denoising Methods
Keywords
independent component analysis, motion artifact removal, head movement, fMRI denoising, scrubbing, autocorrelation structure, resting-state fMRI, task-based fMRI
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, Cerebrospinal Fluid, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Motion, Rest, Reproducibility of Results, Artifacts, Principal Component Analysis

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