AFNI Message Board

Dear AFNI users-

We are very pleased to announce that the new AFNI Message Board framework is up! Please join us at:

https://discuss.afni.nimh.nih.gov

Existing user accounts have been migrated, so returning users can login by requesting a password reset. New users can create accounts, as well, through a standard account creation process. Please note that these setup emails might initially go to spam folders (esp. for NIH users!), so please check those locations in the beginning.

The current Message Board discussion threads have been migrated to the new framework. The current Message Board will remain visible, but read-only, for a little while.

Sincerely, AFNI HQ

History of AFNI updates  

|
December 10, 2020 12:34PM
Hi,
I am trying to do a general functional connectivity analysis as described in:
Elliott, Maxwell L., et al. "General functional connectivity: Shared features of resting-state and task fMRI drive reliable and heritable individual differences in functional brain networks." NeuroImage 189 (2019): 516-532.

However, I had questions when I was doing 3dDeconvolve and bandpassing. I have seen two methods, one generating bandpass regressors via 1dBport and using these regressors in 3dDeconvolve, and then running anaticor, as below:
"Method 1"
3dDeconvolve -input pb00.$subj.r*.tcat+tlrc.HEAD \
-censor motion_${subj}_censor.1D \
-ortvec bandpass_rall.1D bandpass \
-polort A -float

The other method ("Method 2") involves using 3dDeconvolve without the bandpass regressors, running anaticor, and then using 3drsfc with nodetrend, as below:
3dRSFC -prefix gfcanalysis_output -nodetrend 0.01 0.1 errts.test.$subj.fanaticor+tlrc

Using these two analyses steps results in somewhat different results that appear to cover similar regions when subsequently calculating seed-based RSFC, but are certainly not identical. Is there rationale for choosing one method over the other? I thought that doing Method 1 might be more sound given that there is only one regression step, but I am unsure and don't have too much experience in conducting RSFC analyses.

Any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you !!
Subject Author Posted

Conducting bandpassing in one step with versus in two steps

mp6310 December 10, 2020 12:34PM

Re: Conducting bandpassing in one step with versus in two steps

ptaylor December 10, 2020 12:50PM

Re: Conducting bandpassing in one step with versus in two steps

mp6310 December 11, 2020 09:13AM