Biomedical subjects

David Rottenberg

Publications and source records attributed to David Rottenberg.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Quantitative evaluation of three cortical surface flattening methods.

During the past decade, several computational approaches have been proposed for the task of mapping highly convoluted surfaces of the human brain to simpler geometric objects such as a sphere or a topological disc. We report the results of a quantitative comparison of FreeSurfer, CirclePack, and LSCM with respect to measurements of geometric distortion and computational speed. Our results indicate that FreeSurfer performs best with respect to a global measurement of metric distortion, whereas LSCM performs best with respect to angular distortion and best in all but one case with a local measurement of metric distortion. FreeSurfer provides more homogeneous distribution of metric distortion across the whole cortex than CirclePack and LSCM. LSCM is the most computationally efficient algorithm for generating spherical maps, while CirclePack is extremely fast for generating planar maps from patches.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2004

Quantitative comparison of four brain extraction algorithms.

In a companion paper (Rehm et al., 2004), we introduced Minneapolis Consensus Strip (McStrip), a hybrid algorithm for brain/non-brain segmentation. In this paper, we compare the performance of McStrip and three brain extraction algorithms (BEAs) in widespread use within the neuroimaging community--Statistical Parametric Mapping v.2 (SPM2), Brain Extraction Tool (BET), and Brain Surface Extractor (BSE)--to the "gold standard" of manually stripped T1-weighted MRI brain volumes. Our comparison was based on quantitative boundary and volume metrics, reproducibility across repeat scans of a single subject, and assessments of performance consistency across datasets acquired on different scanners at different institutions. McStrip, a hybrid method incorporating warping to a template, intensity thresholding, and edge detection, consistently outperformed SPM2, BET, and BSE, all of which rely on a single algorithmic strategy.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2004

Putting our heads together: a consensus approach to brain/non-brain segmentation in T1-weighted MR volumes.

We describe an approach to brain extraction from T1-weighted MR volumes that uses a hierarchy of masks created by different models to form a consensus mask. The algorithm (McStrip) incorporates atlas-based extraction via nonlinear warping, intensity-threshold masking with connectivity constraints, and edge-based masking with morphological operations. Volume and boundary metrics were computed to evaluate the reproducibility and accuracy of McStrip against manual brain extraction on 38 scans from normal and ataxic subjects. McStrip masks were reproducible across six repeat scans of a normal subject and were significantly more accurate than the masks produced by any of the individual algorithmic components.

Algorithms↗

PubMed2004

Optimizing the fMRI data-processing pipeline using prediction and reproducibility performance metrics: I. A preliminary group analysis.

We argue that published results demonstrate that new insights into human brain function may be obscured by poor and/or limited choices in the data-processing pipeline, and review the work on performance metrics for optimizing pipelines: prediction, reproducibility, and related empirical Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve metrics. Using the NPAIRS split-half resampling framework for estimating prediction/reproducibility metrics (Strother et al., 2002), we illustrate its use by testing the relative importance of selected pipeline components (interpolation, in-plane spatial smoothing, temporal detrending, and between-subject alignment) in a group analysis of BOLD-fMRI scans from 16 subjects performing a block-design, parametric-static-force task. Large-scale brain networks were detected using a multivariate linear discriminant analysis (canonical variates analysis, CVA) that was tuned to fit the data. We found that tuning the CVA model and spatial smoothing were the most important processing parameters. Temporal detrending was essential to remove low-frequency, reproducing time trends; the number of cosine basis functions for detrending was optimized by assuming that separate epochs of baseline scans have constant, equal means, and this assumption was assessed with prediction metrics. Higher-order polynomial warps compared to affine alignment had only a minor impact on the performance metrics. We found that both prediction and reproducibility metrics were required for optimizing the pipeline and give somewhat different results. Moreover, the parameter settings of components in the pipeline interact so that the current practice of reporting the optimization of components tested in relative isolation is unlikely to lead to fully optimized processing pipelines.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

The evaluation of preprocessing choices in single-subject BOLD fMRI using NPAIRS performance metrics.

This work proposes an alternative to simulation-based receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis for assessment of fMRI data analysis methodologies. Specifically, we apply the rapidly developing nonparametric prediction, activation, influence, and reproducibility resampling (NPAIRS) framework to obtain cross-validation-based model performance estimates of prediction accuracy and global reproducibility for various degrees of model complexity. We rely on the concept of an analysis chain meta-model in which all parameters of the preprocessing steps along with the final statistical model are treated as estimated model parameters. Our ROC analog, then, consists of plotting prediction vs. reproducibility results as curves of model complexity for competing meta-models. Two theoretical underpinnings are crucial to utilizing this new validation technique. First, we explore the relationship between global signal-to-noise and our reproducibility estimates as derived previously. Second, we submit our model complexity curves in the prediction versus reproducibility space as reflecting classic bias-variance tradeoffs. Among the particular analysis chains considered, we found little impact in performance metrics with alignment, some benefit with temporal detrending, and greatest improvement with spatial smoothing.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

The quantitative evaluation of functional neuroimaging experiments: the NPAIRS data analysis framework.

We introduce a data-analysis framework and performance metrics for evaluating and optimizing the interaction between activation tasks, experimental designs, and the methodological choices and tools for data acquisition, preprocessing, data analysis, and extraction of statistical parametric maps (SPMs). Our NPAIRS (nonparametric prediction, activation, influence, and reproducibility resampling) framework provides an alternative to simulations and ROC curves by using real PET and fMRI data sets to examine the relationship between prediction accuracy and the signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs) associated with reproducible SPMs. Using cross-validation resampling we plot training-test set predictions of the experimental design variables (e.g., brain-state labels) versus reproducibility SNR metrics for the associated SPMs. We demonstrate the utility of this framework across the wide range of performance metrics obtained from [(15)O]water PET studies of 12 age- and sex-matched data sets performing different motor tasks (8 subjects/set). For the 12 data sets we apply NPAIRS with both univariate and multivariate data-analysis approaches to: (1) demonstrate that this framework may be used to obtain reproducible SPMs from any data-analysis approach on a common Z-score scale (rSPM[Z]); (2) demonstrate that the histogram of a rSPM[Z] image may be modeled as the sum of a data-analysis-dependent noise distribution and a task-dependent, Gaussian signal distribution that scales monotonically with our reproducibility performance metric; (3) explore the relation between prediction and reproducibility performance metrics with an emphasis on bias-variance tradeoffs for flexible, multivariate models; and (4) measure the broad range of reproducibility SNRs and the significant influence of individual subjects. A companion paper describes learning curves for four of these 12 data sets, which describe an alternative mutual-information prediction metric and NPAIRS reproducibility as a function of training-set sizes from 2 to 18 subjects. We propose the NPAIRS framework as a validation tool for testing and optimizing methodological choices and tools in functional neuroimaging.

Adult↗