» Articles » PMID: 17094118

Validity and Power in Hemodynamic Response Modeling: a Comparison Study and a New Approach

Overview
Journal Hum Brain Mapp
Publisher Wiley
Specialty Neurology
Date 2006 Nov 10
PMID 17094118
Citations 74
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

One of the advantages of event-related functional MRI (fMRI) is that it permits estimation of the shape of the hemodynamic response function (HRF) elicited by cognitive events. Although studies to date have focused almost exclusively on the magnitude of evoked HRFs across different tasks, there is growing interest in testing other statistics, such as the time-to-peak and duration of activation as well. Although there are many ways to estimate such parameters, we suggest three criteria for optimal estimation: 1) the relationship between parameter estimates and neural activity must be as transparent as possible; 2) parameter estimates should be independent of one another, so that true differences among conditions in one parameter (e.g., hemodynamic response delay) are not confused for apparent differences in other parameters (e.g., magnitude); and 3) statistical power should be maximized. In this work, we introduce a new modeling technique, based on the superposition of three inverse logit functions (IL), designed to achieve these criteria. In simulations based on real fMRI data, we compare the IL model with several other popular methods, including smooth finite impulse response (FIR) models, the canonical HRF with derivatives, nonlinear fits using a canonical HRF, and a standard canonical model. The IL model achieves the best overall balance between parameter interpretability and power. The FIR model was the next-best choice, with gains in power at some cost to parameter independence. We provide software implementing the IL model.

Citing Articles

Interpretation of individual differences in computational neuroscience using a latent input approach.

Schaaf J, Miletic S, van Duijvenvoorde A, Huizenga H Dev Cogn Neurosci. 2025; 72:101512.

PMID: 39854872 PMC: 11804603. DOI: 10.1016/j.dcn.2025.101512.


The contribution of the vascular architecture and cerebrovascular reactivity to the BOLD signal formation across cortical depth.

Roefs E, Schellekens W, Baez-Yanez M, Bhogal A, Groen I, van Osch M Imaging Neurosci (Camb). 2024; 2:1-19.

PMID: 39411228 PMC: 11472217. DOI: 10.1162/imag_a_00203.


Layer-specific BOLD effects in gradient and spin-echo acquisitions in somatosensory cortex.

Yang Z, Arabinda M, Wang F, Chen L, Gore J Magn Reson Med. 2024; 93(3):1314-1328.

PMID: 39370926 PMC: 11680728. DOI: 10.1002/mrm.30326.


Conscious but not thinking-Mind-blanks during visuomotor tracking: An fMRI study of endogenous attention lapses.

Zaky M, Shoorangiz R, Poudel G, Yang L, Innes C, Jones R Hum Brain Mapp. 2024; 45(11):e26781.

PMID: 39023172 PMC: 11256154. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.26781.


Seeing more than the Tip of the Iceberg: Approaches to Subthreshold Effects in Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain.

Sundermann B, Pfleiderer B, McLeod A, Mathys C Clin Neuroradiol. 2024; 34(3):531-539.

PMID: 38842737 PMC: 11339104. DOI: 10.1007/s00062-024-01422-2.


References
1.
Aguirre G, Zarahn E, DEsposito M . The variability of human, BOLD hemodynamic responses. Neuroimage. 1998; 8(4):360-9. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.1998.0369. View

2.
Birn R, Saad Z, Bandettini P . Spatial heterogeneity of the nonlinear dynamics in the FMRI BOLD response. Neuroimage. 2001; 14(4):817-26. DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2001.0873. View

3.
Noll D, Cohen J, Meyer C, Schneider W . Spiral K-space MR imaging of cortical activation. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1995; 5(1):49-56. DOI: 10.1002/jmri.1880050112. View

4.
Aguirre G, Singh R, DEsposito M . Stimulus inversion and the responses of face and object-sensitive cortical areas. Neuroreport. 1999; 10(1):189-94. DOI: 10.1097/00001756-199901180-00036. View

5.
Bellgowan P, Saad Z, Bandettini P . Understanding neural system dynamics through task modulation and measurement of functional MRI amplitude, latency, and width. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003; 100(3):1415-9. PMC: 298787. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0337747100. View