Extended unified SEM approach for modeling event-related fMRI data

NeuroImage

Volumn 54, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 1151-1158

  Gates, Kathleen M ^a   Molenaar, Peter C M ^a   Hillary, Frank G ^a   Slobounov, Semyon ^a  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COVARIANCE; EXTENDED UNIFIED STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING; FUNCTIONAL MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NERVE CELL NETWORK; NEUROIMAGING; OXYGEN BLOOD LEVEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELING;

BRAIN; BRAIN MAPPING; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, NEUROLOGICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NEURAL PATHWAYS;

EID: 78649663945     PISSN: 10538119     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.08.051     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Ashburner J., Neelin P., Collins D.L., Evans A., Friston K. Incorporating prior knowledge into image registration. Neuroimage 1997, 6(4):344-352.
2. Bekker P.A., Merckens A., Wansbeek T.J. Identification, equivalent models, and computer algebra 1994, Academic Press, Boston.
3. Brown, T. A. 2006. Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Applied Research. Gilford Press. New York.
4. Chow, S.M., Ho, M.R., Hamaker, E.L., Dolan, C.V., 2010. Equivalence and differences between structural equation modeling and state-space modeling techniques. Struct. Equ. Model.: Multi. J. 17, 303-332.
5. Cronbach L.J. Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychol. Bull. 1987, 102:414-417.
6. de Marco G., Devauchelle B., Berquin P. Brain functioning modeling, what do we measure with fMRI data?. Neurosci. Res. 2009, 64:12-19.
7. Fnaiech F., Ljung L. Recursive identification of bilinear systems. Int. J. Control 1987, 45:453-470.
8. Friston K.J. Dynamic causal modeling. Statistical parametric mapping: the analysis of functional brain images 2007, 541-560. Amsterdam: Academic Press. K.J. Friston, J.T. Ashburner, S.J. Kiebel, T.E. Nichols, W.D. Penny (Eds.).
9. Friston K.J., Stephan K. Modeling brain responses. Statistical parametric mapping: the analysis of functional brain images 2007, 32-45. Academic Press, Amsterdam. K.J. Friston, J.T. Ashburner, S.J. Kiebel, T.E. Nichols, W.D. Penny (Eds.).
10. Friston K.J., Holmes A.P., Poline J.B., Grasby P.J., Williams S.C., Frackowiak R.S., Turner R. Analysis of fMRI time-series revisited. Neuroimage 1995, 2:45-53.
11. Friston K.J., Buechel C., Fink G.R., Morris J., Rolls E., Dolan R.J. Psychophysiological and modulatory interactions in neuroimaging. Neuroimage 1997, 6:218-229.
12. Gates, K.M., Molenaar, P.C.M., Hillary, F., Ram., N., & Rovine, M., 2010. Automatic search for fMRI connectivity mapping: An alternative to Granger causality testing using formal equivalences between SEM path modeling, VAR, and unified SEM. NeuroImage 53, 1118-1125.
13. Genova H.M., Hillary F.G., Wylie G., Rypma B., Deluca J. Examination of processing speed deficits in multiple sclerosis using functional magnetic resonance imaging. J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc. 2009, 15:383-393.
14. Goebel R., Roebroeck A., Kim D.S., Formisano E. Investigating directed cortical interactions in time-resolved fMRI data using vector autoregressive modeling and Granger causality mapping. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2003, 21:1251-1261.
15. Hamaker, E.L., Dolan, C.V., Molenaar, P.C.M., 2002. On the nature of SEM estimates of ARMA parameters. Struct. Equ. Model. 9, 347-368.
16. Harrison L., Stephen K., Friston K. Effective connectivity. Statistical parametric mapping: the analysis of functional brain images 2007, 508-521. Academic Press, Amsterdam. K.J. Friston, J.T. Ashburner, S.J. Kiebel, T.E. Nichols, W.D. Penny (Eds.).
17. Heyde C.C. Quasi-likelihood and its application: a general approach to optimal parameter estimation 1997, Springer, New York.
18. Hillary F.G., Genova H.M., Medaglia J.M., Fitzpatrick N.M., Chiou K.S., Wardecker B.M., DeLuca J. Speed of information processing deficits in traumatic brain injury: is less brain more?. Brain Imaging Behav. 2010, 4:141-154.
19. Hu, L., Bentler, P.M. 1998. Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychol. Methods 3, 424-453.
20. Kenny D.A., McCoach D.B. Effect of the number of variables on measures fit in structural equation modeling. Struct. Equ. Model.: Multi. J. 2003, 10:333-351.
21. Kim J., Zhu W., Chang L., Bentler P.M., Ernst T. Unified structural equation modeling approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional MRI data. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2007, 28:85-93.
22. Lindquist M.A. The statistical analysis of fMRI data. Stat. Sci. 2008, 23:439-464.
23. Lütkepohl Helmut New introduction to multiple time series analysis 2005, Springer, Berlin.
24. Mathews V.J., Sicuranza G.L. Polynomial signal processing 2000, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, England.
25. McIntosh A.R., Gonzalez-Lima F. Structural equation modeling and its application to network analysis in functional brain imaging. Hum. Brain Mapp. 1994, 2:2-22.
26. Raichle M.E., Snyder A.Z. A default mode of brain function: a brief history of an evolving idea. Neuroimage 2007, 37:1083-1090.
27. Robinson L.F., Wager T., Lindquist M. Change point estimation in multi-subject fMRI studies. Neuroimage 2010, 49:1581-1592.
28. Rypma B., Berger J.S., Prabhakaran V., Bly B.M., Kimberg D.Y., Biswal B.B., D'Esposito M. Neural correlates of cognitive efficiency. Neuroimage 2006, 33:969-979.
29. Sarty G.E. Computational brain activity maps from fMRI time-series images 2007, Cambridge University Press, New York.
30. Schermelleh-Engel K., Moosbrugger H., Müller H. Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods Psychol. Res. Online 2003, 8:23-74.
31. Smith A. Symbol Digits Modalities Test 1982, Western Psychological Services, Los Angeles, CA.
32. Sporns O., Chialvo D.R., Kaiser M., Hilgetag C.C. Organization, development, and function of complex brain networks. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2004, 8:418-426.
33. Stephan K.E., Penny W.D., Moran R.J., den Ouden H.E.M., Daunizeau J., Friston K.J. Ten simple rules for dynamic causal modeling. Neuroimage 2010, 49:3099-3109.
34. Tononi G., Edelman G.M., Sporns O. Complexity and coherency: integrating information in the brain. Trends Cogn. Sci. 1998, 2:474-484.
35. Vazquez A.L., Cohen E.R., Gulani V., Hernandez-Garcia L., Zheng Y., Lee G.R., Kim S.G., Grotberg J.B., Noll D.C. Vascular dynamics and bold fMRI: Cbf level effects and analysis considerations. Neuroimage 2006, 32:1642-1655.