TY - JOUR
T1 - Bridging the Gap
T2 - Dynamic Causal Modeling and Granger Causality Analysis of Resting State Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging
AU - Bajaj, Sahil
AU - Adhikari, Bhim M.
AU - Friston, Karl J.
AU - Dhamala, Mukesh
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Copyright 2016, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
PY - 2016/10
Y1 - 2016/10
N2 - Granger causality (GC) and dynamic causal modeling (DCM) are the two key approaches used to determine the directed interactions among brain areas. Recent discussions have provided a constructive account of the merits and demerits. GC, on one side, considers dependencies among measured responses, whereas DCM, on the other, models how neuronal activity in one brain area causes dynamics in another. In this study, our objective was to establish construct validity between GC and DCM in the context of resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We first established the face validity of both approaches using simulated fMRI time series, with endogenous fluctuations in two nodes. Crucially, we tested both unidirectional and bidirectional connections between the two nodes to ensure that both approaches give veridical and consistent results, in terms of model comparison. We then applied both techniques to empirical data and examined their consistency in terms of the (quantitative) in-degree of key nodes of the default mode. Our simulation results suggested a (qualitative) consistency between GC and DCM. Furthermore, by applying nonparametric GC and stochastic DCM to resting-state fMRI data, we confirmed that both GC and DCM infer similar (quantitative) directionality between the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), the medial prefrontal cortex, the left middle temporal cortex, and the left angular gyrus. These findings suggest that GC and DCM can be used to estimate directed functional and effective connectivity from fMRI measurements in a consistent manner.
AB - Granger causality (GC) and dynamic causal modeling (DCM) are the two key approaches used to determine the directed interactions among brain areas. Recent discussions have provided a constructive account of the merits and demerits. GC, on one side, considers dependencies among measured responses, whereas DCM, on the other, models how neuronal activity in one brain area causes dynamics in another. In this study, our objective was to establish construct validity between GC and DCM in the context of resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We first established the face validity of both approaches using simulated fMRI time series, with endogenous fluctuations in two nodes. Crucially, we tested both unidirectional and bidirectional connections between the two nodes to ensure that both approaches give veridical and consistent results, in terms of model comparison. We then applied both techniques to empirical data and examined their consistency in terms of the (quantitative) in-degree of key nodes of the default mode. Our simulation results suggested a (qualitative) consistency between GC and DCM. Furthermore, by applying nonparametric GC and stochastic DCM to resting-state fMRI data, we confirmed that both GC and DCM infer similar (quantitative) directionality between the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC), the medial prefrontal cortex, the left middle temporal cortex, and the left angular gyrus. These findings suggest that GC and DCM can be used to estimate directed functional and effective connectivity from fMRI measurements in a consistent manner.
KW - Granger causality
KW - dynamic causal modeling
KW - effective connectivity
KW - functional magnetic resonance imaging
KW - resting state
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84992745701&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84992745701&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/brain.2016.0422
DO - 10.1089/brain.2016.0422
M3 - Article
C2 - 27506256
AN - SCOPUS:84992745701
SN - 2158-0014
VL - 6
SP - 652
EP - 661
JO - Brain connectivity
JF - Brain connectivity
IS - 8
ER -