Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Multiple Comparison Correction in SPMs Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008 Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Multiple Comparison Correction in SPMs Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008 Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008."— Presentation transcript:

1 Multiple Comparison Correction in SPMs Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008 Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008

2 realignment & motion correction smoothing normalisation General Linear Model Ümodel fitting Üstatistic image corrected p-values image data parameter estimates design matrix anatomical reference kernel Statistical Parametric Map Random Field Theory

3 Inference at a single voxel  = p(t>u|H) NULL hypothesis, H: activation is zero u=2 t-distribution We can choose u to ensure a voxel-wise significance level of   his is called an ‘uncorrected’ p-value, for reasons we’ll see later. We can then plot a map of above threshold voxels.

4 Inference for Images Signal+Noise Noise

5 Using an ‘uncorrected’ p-value of 0.1 will lead us to conclude on average that 10% of voxels are active when they are not. This is clearly undesirable. To correct for this we can define a null hypothesis for images of statistics.

6 Family-wise Null Hypothesis FAMILY-WISE NULL HYPOTHESIS: Activation is zero everywhere If we reject a voxel null hypothesis at any voxel, we reject the family-wise Null hypothesis A FP anywhere in the image gives a Family Wise Error (FWE) Family-Wise Error (FWE) rate = ‘corrected’ p-value

7 Use of ‘uncorrected’ p-value,  =0.1 FWE Use of ‘corrected’ p-value,  =0.1

8 The Bonferroni correction The Family-Wise Error rate (FWE), ,a family of N independent The Family-Wise Error rate (FWE), , for a family of N independent voxels is α = Nv α = Nv where v is the voxel-wise error rate. Therefore, to ensure a particular FWE set v = α / N BUT...

9 The Bonferroni correction Independent VoxelsSpatially Correlated Voxels Bonferroni is too conservative for brain images

10 Random Field Theory Consider a statistic image as a discretisation of a continuous underlying random fieldConsider a statistic image as a discretisation of a continuous underlying random field Use results from continuous random field theoryUse results from continuous random field theory Consider a statistic image as a discretisation of a continuous underlying random fieldConsider a statistic image as a discretisation of a continuous underlying random field Use results from continuous random field theoryUse results from continuous random field theory Discretisation

11 Euler Characteristic (EC) Topological measure –threshold an image at u -EC = # blobs -at high u: Prob blob = avg (EC) So FWE,  = avg (EC) Topological measure –threshold an image at u -EC = # blobs -at high u: Prob blob = avg (EC) So FWE,  = avg (EC)

12 Example – 2D Gaussian images α = R (4 ln 2) (2π) -3/2 u exp (-u 2 /2) Voxel-wise threshold, u Number of Resolution Elements (RESELS), R N=100x100 voxels, Smoothness FWHM=10, gives R=10x10=100

13 Example – 2D Gaussian images α = R (4 ln 2) (2π) -3/2 u exp (-u 2 /2) For R=100 and α=0.05 RFT gives u=3.8

14 Estimated component fields data matrix design matrix parameters errors + ? =  ? voxels scans Üestimate  ^  residuals estimated component fields parameter estimates estimated variance   = Each row is an estimated component field

15 Applied Smoothing Smoothness smoothness » voxel size practically FWHM  3  VoxDim Typical applied smoothing: Single Subj fMRI: 6mm PET: 12mm PET: 12mm Multi Subj fMRI: 8-12mm Multi Subj fMRI: 8-12mm PET: 16mm PET: 16mm

16 SPM results I Activations Significant at Cluster level But not at Voxel Level

17

18 SPM results II Activations Significant at Voxel and Cluster level

19 SPM results...

20 False Discovery Rate H True (o)TN=7FP=3 H False (x)FN=0TP=10 Don’t Reject ACTION TRUTH u1 FDR=3/13=23%  =3/10=30% At u1 o o o o o o o x x x o o x x x o x x x x Eg. t-scores from regions that truly do and do not activate FDR = FP/(# Reject)  = FP/(# H True)

21 False Discovery Rate H True (o)TN=9FP=1 H False (x)FN=3TP=7 Don’t Reject ACTION TRUTH u2 o o o o o o o x x x o o x x x o x x x x Eg. t-scores from regions that truly do and do not activate FDR=1/8=13%  =1/10=10% At u2 FDR = FP/(# Reject)  = FP/(# H True)

22 False Discovery Rate Signal+Noise Noise

23

24 SummarySummary We should not use uncorrected p-valuesWe should not use uncorrected p-values We can use Random Field Theory (RFT) to ‘correct’ p-valuesWe can use Random Field Theory (RFT) to ‘correct’ p-values RFT requires FWHM > 3 voxelsRFT requires FWHM > 3 voxels We only need to correct for the volume of interestWe only need to correct for the volume of interest Cluster-level inferenceCluster-level inference False Discovery Rate is a viable alternativeFalse Discovery Rate is a viable alternative We should not use uncorrected p-valuesWe should not use uncorrected p-values We can use Random Field Theory (RFT) to ‘correct’ p-valuesWe can use Random Field Theory (RFT) to ‘correct’ p-values RFT requires FWHM > 3 voxelsRFT requires FWHM > 3 voxels We only need to correct for the volume of interestWe only need to correct for the volume of interest Cluster-level inferenceCluster-level inference False Discovery Rate is a viable alternativeFalse Discovery Rate is a viable alternative


Download ppt "Multiple Comparison Correction in SPMs Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008 Will Penny SPM short course, Zurich, Feb 2008."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google