help
help > RE: Bands of low-to-no % of variance explained in BOLD signal
Jun 17, 2022 10:06 PM | Alfonso Nieto-Castanon - Boston University
RE: Bands of low-to-no % of variance explained in BOLD signal
Hi Hannah,
This looks perhaps like a problem with the coregistration or normalization of the functional data, could you perhaps run the default Quality Control plots and see if there are any issues with the preprocessing steps? (e.g. focus perhaps on the QC_normalization plots, see an example QC report in https://web.conn-toolbox.org/conn-in-pic... to see an example of what to expect in those QC plots)
Best
Alfonso
Originally posted by Hannah Lindsey:
This looks perhaps like a problem with the coregistration or normalization of the functional data, could you perhaps run the default Quality Control plots and see if there are any issues with the preprocessing steps? (e.g. focus perhaps on the QC_normalization plots, see an example QC report in https://web.conn-toolbox.org/conn-in-pic... to see an example of what to expect in those QC plots)
Best
Alfonso
Originally posted by Hannah Lindsey:
Hello!
After running two sessions of data through the preprocessing pipeline for volume-based analyses (indirect normalization to MNI-space) when FieldMaps are available, we moved on to the 1st-level denoising step, but found what appears to be some kind of artifact in the proportion of variance explained in the BOLD signal by the total confounds. I understand that a lack of suprathresholded voxels only indicates that the contribution of the confounds is below 50% of the total variance in the BOLD signal, but there's a distinct band-like pattern to the loss of effect that consistently occurs in the superior-anterior region of the brain on both sessions for about 20% of our subjects (see attached screenshot of the two worst ones). When I increase the threshold, the very small effect turns to a complete loss of any effect of the confounds in those areas. I'm mostly concerned because it has such a consistent and distinct pattern. Is there something we should be doing differently in the preprocessing or change in the denoising settings, or is this something we don't need to worry about?
Thanks a ton for your help!
Hannah
After running two sessions of data through the preprocessing pipeline for volume-based analyses (indirect normalization to MNI-space) when FieldMaps are available, we moved on to the 1st-level denoising step, but found what appears to be some kind of artifact in the proportion of variance explained in the BOLD signal by the total confounds. I understand that a lack of suprathresholded voxels only indicates that the contribution of the confounds is below 50% of the total variance in the BOLD signal, but there's a distinct band-like pattern to the loss of effect that consistently occurs in the superior-anterior region of the brain on both sessions for about 20% of our subjects (see attached screenshot of the two worst ones). When I increase the threshold, the very small effect turns to a complete loss of any effect of the confounds in those areas. I'm mostly concerned because it has such a consistent and distinct pattern. Is there something we should be doing differently in the preprocessing or change in the denoising settings, or is this something we don't need to worry about?
Thanks a ton for your help!
Hannah
Threaded View
| Title | Author | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Hannah Lindsey | Jun 17, 2022 | |
| Hannah Lindsey | Jul 12, 2022 | |
| Hannah Lindsey | Jun 24, 2022 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Jun 17, 2022 | |
| Hannah Lindsey | Jun 21, 2022 | |
| Alfonso Nieto-Castanon | Jun 22, 2022 | |
| Hannah Lindsey | Jun 29, 2022 | |
