IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0106498.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Isolated Assessment of Translation or Rotation Severely Underestimates the Effects of Subject Motion in fMRI Data

Author

Listed:
  • Marko Wilke

Abstract

Subject motion has long since been known to be a major confound in functional MRI studies of the human brain. For resting-state functional MRI in particular, data corruption due to motion artefacts has been shown to be most relevant. However, despite 6 parameters (3 for translations and 3 for rotations) being required to fully describe the head's motion trajectory between timepoints, not all are routinely used to assess subject motion. Using structural (n = 964) as well as functional MRI (n = 200) data from public repositories, a series of experiments was performed to assess the impact of using a reduced parameter set (translationonly and rotationonly) versus using the complete parameter set. It could be shown that the usage of 65 mm as an indicator of the average cortical distance is a valid approximation in adults, although care must be taken when comparing children and adults using the same measure. The effect of using slightly smaller or larger values is minimal. Further, both translationonly and rotationonly severely underestimate the full extent of subject motion; consequently, both translationonly and rotationonly discard substantially fewer datapoints when used for quality control purposes (“motion scrubbing”). Finally, both translationonly and rotationonly severely underperform in predicting the full extent of the signal changes and the overall variance explained by motion in functional MRI data. These results suggest that a comprehensive measure, taking into account all available parameters, should be used to characterize subject motion in fMRI.

Suggested Citation

  • Marko Wilke, 2014. "Isolated Assessment of Translation or Rotation Severely Underestimates the Effects of Subject Motion in fMRI Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-11, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0106498
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106498
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0106498
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0106498&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0106498?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0106498. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.