Intervention Models in Functional Connectivity Identification Applied to fMRI

Abstract

Recent advances in neuroimaging techniques have provided precise spatial localization of brain activation applied in several neuroscience subareas. The development of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), based on the BOLD signal, is one of the most popular techniques related to the detection of neuronal activation. However, understanding the interactions between several neuronal modules is also an important task, providing a better comprehension about brain dynamics. Nevertheless, most connectivity studies in fMRI are based on a simple correlation analysis, which is only an association measure and does not provide the direction of information flow between brain areas. Other proposed methods like structural equation modeling (SEM) seem to be attractive alternatives. However, this approach assumes prior information about the causality direction and stationarity conditions, which may not be satisfied in fMRI experiments. Generally, the fMRI experiments are related to an activation task; hence, the stimulus conditions should also be included in the model. In this paper, we suggest an intervention analysis, which includes stimulus condition, allowing a nonstationary modeling. Furthermore, an illustrative application to real fMRI dataset from a simple motor task is presented.

References

1. S. Ogawa, T.-M. Lee, A. S. Nayak, and P. Glynn, “Oxygenation-sensitive contrast in magnetic resonance image of rodent brain at high magnetic fields,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 68–78, 1990. View at: Google Scholar
2. C. Büchel and K. J. Friston, “Modulation of connectivity in visual pathways by attention: cortical interactions evaluated with structural equation modelling and fMRI,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 7, no. 8, pp. 768–778, 1997. View at: Google Scholar
3. B. Biswal, F. Z. Yetkin, V. M. Haughton, and J. S. Hyde, “Functional connectivity in the motor cortex of resting human brain using echo-planar MRI,” Magnetic Resonance in Medicine, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 537–541, 1995. View at: Google Scholar
4. R. S. J. Frackowiak, K. J. Friston, C. Frith et al., Human Brain Function, Academic Press, San Diego, Calif, USA, 2nd edition, 2003.
5. J. Zhuang, S. LaConte, S. Peltier, K. Zhang, and X. Hu, “Connectivity exploration with structural equation modeling: an fMRI study of bimanual motor coordination,” NeuroImage, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 462–470, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
6. J. B. Rowe, K. E. Stephan, K. Friston, R. S. J. Frackowiak, and R. E. Passingham, “The prefrontal cortex shows context-specific changes in effective connectivity to motor or visual cortex during the selection of action or colour,” Cerebral Cortex, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 85–95, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
7. K. J. Friston, J. Ashburner, C. D. Frith, J.-B. Poline, J. D. Heather, and R. S. J. Frackowiak, “Spatial registration and normalization of images,” Human Brain Mapping, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 165–189, 1995. View at: Google Scholar
8. C. W. J. Granger, “Investigating causal relations by econometric models and cross-spectral methods,” Econometrica, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 424–438, 1969. View at: Google Scholar
9. L. A. Baccalá, K. Sameshima, G. Ballester, A. C. Do Valle, and C. Timo-laria, “Studying the interaction between brain structures via directed coherence and Granger causality,” EURASIP Journal on Applied Signal Processing, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 40–48, 1998. View at: Google Scholar
10. L. A. Baccalá and K. Sameshima, “Partial directed coherence: a new concept in neural structure determination,” Biological Cybernetics, vol. 84, no. 6, pp. 463–474, 2001. View at: Google Scholar
11. R. Goebel, A. Roebroeck, D.-S. Kim, and E. Formisano, “Investigating directed cortical interactions in time-resolved fMRI data using vector autoregressive modeling and Granger causality mapping,” Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 21, no. 10, pp. 1251–1261, 2003. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
12. A. Roebroeck, E. Formisano, and R. Goebel, “Mapping directed influence over the brain using Granger causality and fMRI,” NeuroImage, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 230–242, 2005. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
13. M. J. Kamiński, M. Ding, W. A. Truccolo, and S. L. Bressler, “Evaluating causal relations in neural systems: Granger causality, directed transfer function and statistical assessment of significance,” Biological Cybernetics, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 145–157, 2001. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
14. F. A. Graybill, Theory and Application of the Linear Model, Buxbury Press, Boston, Mass, USA, 1976.
15. H. Lütkepohl, Introduction to Multiple Time Series Analysis, Springer, New York, NY, USA, 1993.
16. P. K. Sen and J. M. Singer, Large Sample Methods in Statistics - An Introduction with Applications, Chapman and Hall, New York, NY, USA, 1980.
17. M. J. Brammer, E. T. Bullmore, A. Simmons et al., “Generic brain activation mapping in functional magnetic resonance imaging: a nonparametric approach,” Magnetic Resonance Imaging, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 763–770, 1997. View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
18. J. Talairach and P. Tournoux, A Co-Planar Stereotaxic Atlas of the Human Brain, Thieme, Stuttgart, Germany, 1988.
19. E. R. Kandel, J. H. Schwartz, and T. M. Jessell, Principles of Neural Science, McGraw-Hill Medical, New York, NY, USA, 4th edition, 2000.
20. A. Ikeda, S. Yazawa, T. Kunieda et al., “Cognitive motor control in human pre-supplementary motor area studied by subdural recording of discrimination/selection-related potentials,” Brain, vol. 122, no. 5, pp. 915–931, 1999. View at: Google Scholar
21. M. Humberstone, G. Sawle, S. Clare et al., “Functional MRI of single motor events,” Annals of Neurology, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 632–637, 1997. View at: Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2006 João Ricardo Sato et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.