Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Human Brain Mapping logoLink to Human Brain Mapping
. 1999 Nov 30;8(4):245–258. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0193(1999)8:4<245::AID-HBM8>3.0.CO;2-#

On two methods of statistical image analysis

J Missimer 1,✉, U Knorr 2, RP Maguire 2, H Herzog 3, RJ Seitz, L Tellman 3, KL Leenders 1,4
PMCID: PMC6873306  PMID: 10619418

Abstract

The computerized brain atlas (CBA) and statistical parametric mapping (SPM) are two procedures for voxel‐based statistical evaluation of PET activation studies. Each includes spatial standardization of image volumes, computation of a statistic, and evaluation of its significance. In addition, smoothing and correcting for differences of global means are commonly performed in SPM before statistical analysis. We report a comparison of methods in an analysis of regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) in 10 human volunteers and 10 simulated activations. For the human studies, CBA or linear SPM standarization methods were followed by smoothing and computation of a statistic with the paired t‐test of CBA or general linear model of SPM. No standardization, linear, and nonlinear SPM standardization were applied to the simulations. Significance of the statistic was evaluated using the cluster‐size method common to SPM and CBA. SPM employs the theory of Gaussian random fields to estimate the cluster size distributions; simulations described in the Appendix provided empirical distributions derived from t‐maps. The quantities evaluated were number and size of functional regions (FRs), maximum statistic, average resting rCBF, and percentage change. For the simulations, the efficiency of signal detection and rate of false positives could be evaluated as well as the distributions of statistics and cluster size in the absense of signal. The similarity of the results yielded by similar methods of analysis for the human studies and the simulated activations substantiates the robustness of the methods for selecting functional regions. However, the analysis of simulated activations demonstrated that quantitative evaluation of significance of a functional region encounters important obstacles at every stage of the analysis. Hum. Brain Mapping 8:245–258, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Keywords: positron emission tomography, PET, human brain, activation studies, spatial standardization, evaluation of significance

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (218.8 KB).

REFERENCES

  1. Adler RJ, Hasofer AM. 1981. The Geometry of Random Fields. New York: Wiley‐Liss, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bohm C, Greitz T, Blomqvist G, Farde L, Forsgren PO, Kingsley D. 1986. Applications of a computerized adjustable brain atlas in positron emission tomography. Acta Radiol Suppl 369:449–452. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=92238235&form=6&db=m&Dopt=r [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Friston KJ, Frith CD, Liddle PF, Dolan RJ, Lammertsma AA, Frackowiak RSJ. 1990. The relationship between global and local changes in PET scans. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 10:458–466. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=90270299&form=6&db=m&Dopt=r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Friston KJ, Frith CD, Liddle PF, Frackowiak RSJ. 1991a. Comparing functional (PET) images: assessment of significant change. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 11:690–699. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Friston KJ, Frith CD, Liddle PF, Frackowiak RSJ. 1991b. Plastic transformation of PET images. J Comput Assisted Tomography 15:634–639. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Friston KJ, Worsley KJ, Frackowiak RSJ, Mazziotta JC, Evans AC. 1994. Assessing the significance of focal activations using their spatial extent. Hum Brain Mapp 1:210–220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Friston KJ, Ashburner J, Frith CD, Poline J‐B, Heather JD, Frackowiak RSJ. 1995. Spatial registration and normalization of images. Hum Brain Mapp 2:165–189. [Google Scholar]
  8. Greitz T, Bohm C, Holte S, Eriksson L. 1991. A computerized brain atlas: construction, anatomical content, and some applications. J Comput Assisted Tomography 15:26–38. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Herzog H, Seitz RJ, Tellmann L, Rota Kops E, Jülicher F, Schlaug G, Kleinschmidt A, Mueller‐Gärtner HW. 1996. Quantification of regional cerebral blood flow with 15O‐butanol and positron emission tomography in humans. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 16:645–649. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=96267137&form=6&db=m&Dopt=r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Knorr U, Weder B, Kleinschmidt A, Wirrwar A, Huang Y, Herzog H, Seitz RJ. 1993. Identification of task‐specific rCBF changes in individual subjects: validation and application for PET. J Comput Assisted Tomography 17:517–528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Missimer J, Knorr U, Seitz RJ, Maguire RP, Schlaug G, Herzog H, Tellmann L, Leenders KL. 1996. Localization of rCBF increases in human frontal cortex and cerebellum in voluntary index flexion movements In: Myers R, Cunningham B, Bailey D, Jones T. (eds): Quantification of Brain Function using PET. San Diego: Academic Press, pp 393–397. [Google Scholar]
  12. Roland PE, Levin B, Kawashima R, Åkerman S. 1993. Three‐dimensional analysis of clustered voxels in 15O‐butanol brain activation images. Hum Brain Mapp 1:3–19. [Google Scholar]
  13. Roland PE, Graufelds CJ, Wåhlin J, Ingelman L, Andersson M, Ledberg A, Pederson J, Åkerman S, Dabringhaus A, Zilles K. 1994. Human brain atlas: for high‐resolution functional and anatomical mapping. Hum Brain Mapp 1:173–184. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Rota Kops E, Herzog H, Schmid A, Holte S, Feinendegen LE. 1990. Performance characteristics of an eight‐ring whole body PET scanner. J Comput Assisted Tomography 14:437–445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Seitz RJ, Bohm C, Greitz T, Roland PE, Eriksson L, Blomqvist G, Rosenqvist, Nordell B. 1990. Accuracy and precision of the computerized brain atlas programme for localization and quantification in positron emission tomography. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 10:443–457. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=90270298&form=6&db=m&Dopt=r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Steinmetz H, Fürst G, Freund HJ. 1989. Cerebral cortical localization: application and validation of the proportional grid system in MR Imaging. J Comput Assisted Tomography 13:10–19. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Talairach T, Tournoux P. 1988. Co‐planar Stereotactic Atlas of the Human Brain. Stuttgart, Germany: Thieme. [Google Scholar]
  18. Varga AC. 1984. Declaration of Helsinki (adopted by the 18th World Medical Assembly in Helsinki, Finland, and revised by the 29th World Medical Assembly in Tokyo, 1975.) In: The Main Issue in Bioethics, rev. ed. New York: Paulist Press.
  19. Worsley KJ, Evans AC, Marrett S, Neelin P. 1992. A three‐dimensional statistical analysis for CBF activation studies in human brain. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab 12:900–918. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov:80/htbin-post/Entrez/query?uid=93016346&form=6&db=m&Dopt=r [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Worsley KJ, Marrett S, Neelin P, Vandal AC, Friston KJ, Evans AC. 1996. A unified statistical approach for determining significant signals in images of cerebral activation. Hum Brain Mapp 4:58–73. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Wunderlich G, Knorr K, Stephan KM, Tellmann L, Azari NP, Herzog H, Seitz R. 1997. Dynamic scanning of 15O‐butanol with positron emission tomography can identify regional cerebral activations. Hum Brain Mapp 5:364–378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Human Brain Mapping are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES