4.7 Article

Mitigating head motion artifact in functional connectivity MRI

期刊

NATURE PROTOCOLS
卷 13, 期 12, 页码 2801-2826

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41596-018-0065-y

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [R01MH107703, R01MH112847, R21MH106799, R01EB022573, R01MH101111]
  2. Lifespan Brain Institute at Penn/CHOP
  3. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
  4. Alfred P. Sloan Foundation
  5. Army Research Laboratory [W911NF1020022]
  6. Army Research Office [W911NF1410679, W911NF1610474]
  7. National Institute of Health [R01DC00920911, R01HD086888, R01MH107235, R01MH109520, R01NS099348]
  8. U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) [W911NF1610474] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Participant motion during functional magnetic resonance image (fMRI) acquisition produces spurious signal fluctuations that can confound measures of functional connectivity. Without mitigation, motion artifact can bias statistical inferences about relationships between connectivity and individual differences. To counteract motion artifact, this protocol describes the implementation of a validated, high-performance denoising strategy that combines a set of model features, including physiological signals, motion estimates, and mathematical expansions, to target both widespread and focal effects of subject movement. This protocol can be used to reduce motion-related variance to near zero in studies of functional connectivity, providing up to a 100-fold improvement over minimal-processing approaches in large datasets. Image denoising requires 40 min to 4 h of computing per image, depending on model specifications and data dimensionality. The protocol additionally includes instructions for assessing the performance of a denoising strategy. Associated software implements all denoising and diagnostic procedures, using a combination of established image-processing libraries and the eXtensible Connectivity Pipeline (XCP) software.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据