Reducing type II error in fMRI analysis: Cluster-extent threshold simulation results and an evaluation of current methods to correct for multiple comparisons
Abstract
Many procedures to correct for multiple comparisons in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analysis require a minimum cluster-extent threshold; however, sample size (N) is often not modeled. In this study, a series of simulations was conducted where N was varied to determine whether this parameter affected cluster threshold. The primary hypothesis was that modeling N in the simulations would reduce cluster thresholds. A secondary hypothesis was that this cluster size reduction was due to between-subject variability, which was tested by eliminating the corresponding standard error term. Acquisition volume parameters were fixed, while key parameters were varied to reflect reasonable ranges: N (10, 20, or 30), corrected p-value (.05, .01, or .001), individual-voxel p-value (.01, .005, or .001), FWHM (3, 5, or 7 mm), and voxel resolution (2 or 3 mm). Each simulation consisted of 100 iterations repeated 100 times, with a total of 4,860,000 iterations and 66,420,000 simulated subjects. There was a significant effect of condition with clusters approximately 18% smaller with versus without N modeled and a significant increase in cluster thresholds for larger sample sizes. Bayesian analysis provided very strong support for the secondary hypothesis. These simulation results were replicated in a real fMRI data set. The present findings indicate that sample size should be incorporated into all methods to provide the most accurate thresholds possible and reduce type II error. A broader range of topics is discussed including balancing type I and type II error, and the assumption that non-task fMRI activity reflects null data is questioned.
02 /Specification & Classification
Click any tag to browse matching papers- Citations
- 4
- FWCI
- 16.47
- Field percentile
- top 1%
- Approach
Reproducibility ledger
Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.
Sign in to file a reproducibility report.
Related papers
- AFNI and Clustering: False Positive Rates Redux
Robert W Cox, Richard C Reynolds, Paul A Taylor·bioRxiv·Jul 26, 2016
- Bayes Estimate of Primary Threshold in Cluster-wise fMRI Inferences
Yunjiang Ge, Stephanie Hare, … Shuo Chen·bioRxiv·Oct 3, 2020
- Implementation of Bayesian Multiple Comparison Correction in the Second-Level Analysis of fMRI Data: With Pilot Analyses of Simulation and Real fMRI Datasets Based on Voxelwise Inference
Hyemin Han·Cognitive NeurosciencePeer-reviewed·Dec 19, 2019
- Cluster Failure Revisited: Impact of First Level Design and Data Quality on Cluster False Positive Rates
Anders Eklund, Hans E. Knutsson, Thomas E. Nichols·Human Brain MappingPeer-reviewed·Oct 15, 2018
- Including Data Analytical Stability in Cluster-basedInference
Sanne Patrick Roels, Tom Loeys, Beatrijs Moerkerke·bioRxiv·Nov 15, 2019
- Power, positive predictive value, and sample size calculations for random field theory-based fMRI inference
Dirk Ostwald, Sebastian Schneider, … Lilla Horváth·bioRxiv·Jun 1, 2019