More "mapping" in brain mapping: Statistical comparison of effects
More "mapping" in brain mapping: Statistical comparison of effects
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/hbm.10108
复制
发表时间：
2003-06-01
影响因子：
4.8
通讯作者：
Ostergaard, AL
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jernigan, TL;Gamst, AC;Ostergaard, AL
在脑成像的背景下，术语“映射”向大多数人传达了定位的概念；也就是说，脑映射旨在揭示某些条件或参数与大脑中特定位置之间的关系。然而，在现实中，传统的基于体素的大脑功能地图，或关于大脑结构的地图，通常是使用分析构建的，这些分析没有产生关于影响的空间不一致性的推断基础。例如，在功能图像的正常分析路径中，不存在任何体素中观察到的效果相对于任何其他体素中的观察效果的统计比较。在这种情况下，严格地说，显著激活的存在只能作为关于大脑作为一个单位的推断的合法基础。在对结果的讨论中，研究人员很少满足于确认大脑的作用，相反，他们通常更喜欢解释他们观察到的空间模式。由于“模式”意味着地图上的非均匀效果，这相当于解释结果而不费心测试它们的重要性，这是大多数受过实验训练的人在其他情况下都会避免的做法。在这篇综述中，我们呼吁调查人员采用一种新的数据呈现标准，以便于在整个地图上比较效果。有证据表明感兴趣结构中的效应之间存在足够的效应大小差异，这应该是解释激活的空间模式的先决条件。(C)2003年Wiley-Liss，Inc.
The term "mapping" in the context of brain imaging conveys to most the concept of localization; that is, a brain map is meant to reveal a relationship between some condition or parameter and specific sites within the brain. However, in reality, conventional voxel-based maps of brain function, or for that matter of brain structure, are generally constructed using analyses that yield no basis for inferences regarding the spatial nonuniformity of the effects. In the normal analysis path for functional images, for example, there is nowhere a statistical comparison of the observed effect in any voxel relative to that in any other voxel. Under these circumstances, strictly speaking, the presence of significant activation serves as a legitimate basis only for inferences about the brain as a unit. In their discussion of results, investigators rarely are content to confirm the brain's role, and instead generally prefer to interpret the spatial patterns they have observed. Since "pattern" implies nonuniform effects over the map, this is equivalent to interpreting results without bothering to test their significance, a practice most of the experimentally-trained would eschew in other contexts. In this review, we appeal to investigators to adopt a new standard of data presentation that facilitates comparison of effects across the map. Evidence for sufficient effect size difference between the effects in structures of interest should be a prerequisite to the interpretation of spatial patterns of activation. (C) 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.