Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 858

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Relationship between Global and Local Changes in PET Scans

Open access
Friston, K. J., Frith, C. D., Liddle, P. F., Dolan, R. J., Lammertsma, A. A., Frackowiak, R. S. J.·1990·Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
DOI 10.1038/jcbfm.1990.88
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In order to localize cerebral cognitive or sensorimotor function, activation paradigms are being used in conjunction with PET measures of cerebral activity (e.g., rCBF). The changes in local cerebral activity have two components: a global, region independent change and a local or regional change. As the first step in localizing the regional effects of an activation, global variance must be removed by a normalization procedure. A simple normalization procedure is division of regional values by the whole brain mean. This requires the dependence of local activity on global activity to be one of simple proportionality. This is shown not to be the case. Furthermore, a systematic deviation from a proportional relationship across brain regions is demonstrated. Consequently, any normalization must be approached on a pixel-by-pixel basis by measuring the change in local activity and change in global activity. The changes associated with an activation can be partitioned into global and local effects according to two models: one assumes that the increase in local activity depends on global values and the other assumes independence. It is shown that the increase in activity due to a cognitive activation is independent of global activity. This independence of the (activation) condition effect and the confounding linear effect of global activity on observed local activity meet the requirements for an analysis of covariance, with the “nuisance” variable as global activity and the activation condition as the categorical independent variable. These conclusions are based on analysis of data from 24 scans: six conditions over four normal subjects using a verbal fluency paradigm. A technique is described based on ANCOVA and using statistical parametric mapping to localize foci in the brain that have been significantly perturbed by the cognitive tasks. This technique represents a fundamental and necessary departure from ROI-based approaches allowing the separation of global and local effects pixel by pixel, and provides an image of affected regions whose significance can be quantified. The specificity and sensitivity of the described method of change detection is assessed.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/jcbfm.1990.88

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.

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

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

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Friston, K. J., Frith, C. D., Liddle, P. F., Dolan, R. J., Lammertsma, A. A., & Frackowiak, R. S. J.
Venue
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
1990-07
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
458-466
ISSN
  • 0271-678X (ISSN-L)
  • 1559-7016
DOI
10.1038/jcbfm.1990.88
OpenAlex
W1966123432
Cited by
858
References
0
FWCI
16.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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.