help
help > RE: need help with dynamic FC between conditions
Apr 25, 2016 07:04 PM | Alfonso Nieto-Castanon - Boston University
RE: need help with dynamic FC between conditions
Hi Shukti and Stephen,
Regarding DynamicFC analyses in the context of multiple conditions, you should simply create one additional condition (e.g. named 'rest') encompassing all of your sessions/conditions, and then select that condition in the 'rest condition' field in the FirstLevel.DynamicFC tab. This will use your entire dataset (both conditions in your case) for the dynamic FC analyses. Then, when clicking 'Done', if you want to obtain condition-specific measures (e.g. look at the components separately between your two conditions) simply check the 'All conditions' checkbox in that gui before clicking on 'Start'.
Regarding DynamicFC analyses in the context of multiple groups (e.g.controls vs. patients) that is perfectly fine. We are hoping to have a manuscript out shortly detailing the specificities of these analyses, but both conceptually and in practice the way these analyses work is very similar to ICA analyses. You first estimate a number of dynamic components using your entire dataset (all subjects across multiple subject groups) and then those global components are "backprojected" into subject-specific and condition-specific factors, allowing you to then compare how these components are expressed across different conditions or across different subject groups. Compared to simply running the analyses separately across different subject groups, which would then require users to manually identify the potentially-similar components across the different analysis results, this methodology allows you to more meaningfully and automatically identify individual components across all subjects, while still allowing to investigate how these individual components might be expressed differently across different subjects or conditions.
Hope this helps
Alfonso
Originally posted by Stephen L.:
Regarding DynamicFC analyses in the context of multiple conditions, you should simply create one additional condition (e.g. named 'rest') encompassing all of your sessions/conditions, and then select that condition in the 'rest condition' field in the FirstLevel.DynamicFC tab. This will use your entire dataset (both conditions in your case) for the dynamic FC analyses. Then, when clicking 'Done', if you want to obtain condition-specific measures (e.g. look at the components separately between your two conditions) simply check the 'All conditions' checkbox in that gui before clicking on 'Start'.
Regarding DynamicFC analyses in the context of multiple groups (e.g.controls vs. patients) that is perfectly fine. We are hoping to have a manuscript out shortly detailing the specificities of these analyses, but both conceptually and in practice the way these analyses work is very similar to ICA analyses. You first estimate a number of dynamic components using your entire dataset (all subjects across multiple subject groups) and then those global components are "backprojected" into subject-specific and condition-specific factors, allowing you to then compare how these components are expressed across different conditions or across different subject groups. Compared to simply running the analyses separately across different subject groups, which would then require users to manually identify the potentially-similar components across the different analysis results, this methodology allows you to more meaningfully and automatically identify individual components across all subjects, while still allowing to investigate how these individual components might be expressed differently across different subjects or conditions.
Hope this helps
Alfonso
Originally posted by Stephen L.:
I am no expert in CONN, but I had the same issue
just now. In my case, I just converted the two conditions into two
sessions for each subject, and then the Dynamic FC could be
computed correctly. I think it should also be perfectly acceptable
for your case since rest1 and rest2 are really just two sessions
for the same subjects, so you don't need to put them as different
conditions.
However, I have another study where there are really two different conditions (controls vs patients), and in this case, if as you say CONN cannot yet find the connectivity for independent conditions, then CONN cannot yet be used for this kind of study. If someone has a solution to this issue, that would be great...
However, I have another study where there are really two different conditions (controls vs patients), and in this case, if as you say CONN cannot yet find the connectivity for independent conditions, then CONN cannot yet be used for this kind of study. If someone has a solution to this issue, that would be great...
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Shukti Ramkiran | Apr 22, 2016 | |
| Stephen L. | Apr 22, 2016 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Apr 25, 2016 | |
| Stephen L. | Apr 26, 2016 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Apr 26, 2016 | |
| Stephen L. | May 26, 2016 | |
| Shukti Ramkiran | Apr 26, 2016 | |
