4.7 Article

Identification of large-scale networks in the brain using fMRI

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 29, 期 4, 页码 1231-1243

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2005.08.044

关键词

functional MRI; functional connectivity; large-scale network; spatial noise modeling; robust estimation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cognition is; thought to result from interactions within large-scale networks of brain regions. Here, we propose a method to identify these large-scale networks using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Regions belonging to such networks are defined as sets of strongly interacting regions, each of which showing a homogeneous temporal activity. Our method of large-scale network identification (LSNI) proceeds by first detecting functionally homogeneous regions. The networks of functional interconnections are then found by comparing the correlations among these regions against a model of the correlations in the noise. To test the LSNI method, we first evaluated its specificity and sensitivity on synthetic data sets. Then, the method was applied to four real data sets with a block-designed motor task. The LSNI method correctly recovered the regions whose temporal activity was locked to the stimulus. In addition, it detected two other main networks highly reproducible across subjects, whose activity was dominated by slow fluctuations (0-0.1 Hz). One was located in medial and dorsal regions, and mostly overlapped the default network of the brain at rest [Greicius, M.D., Krasnow, B., Reiss, A.L., Menon, V., 2003. Functional connectivity in the resting brain: a network analysis of the default mode hypothesis. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the U.S.A. 100, 253-258]; the other was composed of lateral frontal and posterior parietal regions. The LSNI method we propose allows to detect in an exploratory and systematic way all the regions and large-scale networks activated in the working brain. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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