bioRxiv ScienceSearch

Biology subjects

Engemann, D.-A.

Publications and source records attributed to Engemann, D.-A..

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Prediction and inference diverge in biomedicine:Simulations and real-world data

In the 20th century many advances in biological knowledge and evidence-based medicine were supported by p-values and accompanying methods. In the beginning 21st century, ambitions towards precision medicine put a premium on detailed predictions for single individuals. The shift causes tension between traditional methods used to infer statistically significant group differences and burgeoning machine-learning tools suited to forecast an individuals future. This comparison applies the linear model for identifying significant contributing variables and for finding the most predictive variable sets. In systematic data simulations and common medical datasets, we explored how statistical inference and pattern recognition can agree and diverge. Across analysis scenarios, even small predictive performances typically coincided with finding underlying significant statistical relationships. However, even statistically strong findings with very low p-values shed little light on their value for achieving accurate prediction in the same dataset. More complete understanding of different ways to define important associations is a prerequisite for reproducible research findings that can serve to personalize clinical care.

bioinformatics

MEG/EEG group study with MNE: recommendations, quality assessments and best practices

Cognitive neuroscience questions are commonly tested with experiments that involve a cohort of subjects. The cohort can consist of a handful of subjects for small studies to hundreds or thousands of subjects in open datasets.\n\nWhile there exist various online resources to get started with the analysis of magnetoencephalography (MEG) or electroencephalography (EEG) data, such educational materials are usually restricted to the analysis of a single subject. This is in part because data from larger group studies are harder to share, but also analyses of such data are often require subject-specific decisions which are hard to document.\n\nThis work presents the results obtained by the reanalysis of an open dataset from Wakeman and Henson (2015) using the MNE software package. The analysis covers preprocessing steps, quality assurance steps, sensor space analysis of evoked responses, source localization, and statistics in both sensor and source space. Results with possible alternative strategies are presented and discussed at different stages such as the use of high-pass filtering versus baseline correction, tSSS versus SSS, the use of a minimum norm inverse versus LCMV beamformer, and the use of univariate or multivariate statistics. This aims to provide a comparative study of different stages of M/EEG analysis pipeline on the same dataset, with open access to all of the scripts necessary to reproduce this analysis.

neuroscience