老师您好,关于ALFF two-sample t test有四个问题向您请教

Submitted by cappuccinoxt on
老师您好! 在臧老师07年发表的论文中(Altered baseline brain activity in children with ADHD revealed by resting-state functional MRI.Brain Development, 2007),统计部分two-sample t test采用了uncorrected的校正方式(A two-sample t-test was performed to see the ALFF difference between the two groups. Voxels with a P value <0.01 (uncorrected) and cluster size >270 mm3 (10 voxels) were considered to show significant difference between the two groups.)查阅其它ALFF相关文章后,发现关于ALFF的two-sample t test多采用此种分析方式,e.g:For ALFF comparison, a combined threshold of p < 0.005 and a minimum cluster size of 486 mm3 was used, which resulted into a corrected threshold of p < 0.05 determined by AlphaSim program in AFNI.(Abnormal spontaneous brain activity in medication-naïve ADHD children: A resting state fMRI study.Neuroscience Letters,2011). 我的问题是:1.采用此种校正方式,而不是FWE或FDR,是不是因为ALFF双样本T检验得到的结果通常在[-5,5]之间,无法进行FWE或FDR 2.这种校正方法和FWE/FDR有什么区别 3.虽然您07年的文献没有注明,文中采用的P value <0.01 (uncorrected) and cluster size >270 mm3 (10 voxels) 校正方式,是不是也对应着一个 corrected p value? 4.这种对p值uncorrected,又对体素个数进行限定的校正方式,是否和corrected p value有一一对应的关系?如果有,有公式可循吗? 不知道我是否描述清楚了问题,谢谢老师的耐心解答。 学生

YAN Chao-Gan

Mon, 03/12/2012 - 14:21

我的理解: 1. Zang et al., 2007不是AlphaSim校正。 2. FDR只考虑高度,不考虑宽度,SPM的FWE会考虑宽度,但校正非常严。AlphaSim则用随机模拟的方式计算宽度和高度,相对较松一些。详见restfmri.net/forum/course第二部分。 3. 另外一个校正程序Gaussian Random Field theory multiple comparison correction (easythresh in FSL, 来源同SPM的FWE),计算公式见Flitney, D.E., & Jenkinson, M. 2000. Cluster Analysis Revisited. Tech. rept. Oxford Centre for Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Brain, Department of Clinical Neurology, Oxford University, Oxford, UK. TR00DF1. 会在下一版的REST中出现。
Forums