Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[ENH] add methods section #77

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jan 8, 2024
Merged

[ENH] add methods section #77

merged 5 commits into from
Jan 8, 2024

Conversation

Remi-Gau
Copy link
Collaborator

closes #63

This is meant as a first rough step.

@Remi-Gau Remi-Gau marked this pull request as draft December 14, 2023 16:01
@Remi-Gau
Copy link
Collaborator Author

The content should adapt depending on the arguments passed to the CLI.

See example below.


These results were generated with
giga_connectome (version 0.4.2.dev9+ga57c4f7, https://giga-connectome.readthedocs.io/en/latest/)
using Nilearn (version 0.10.3.dev94+g2b1504b68.d20231213, RRID:SCR_001362)
and TemplateFlow (version 0.8.1).

The following steps were followed.

  1. Created subject specific grey matter mask in MNI space (MNI152NLin2009cAsym).

  2. Sampled the Schaefer20187Networks atlas to the space of subject specific grey matter mask in MNI space.

  3. Calculated the conjunction of the customised grey matter mask and resampled atlas to find valid parcels.

  4. Used the new input specific grey matter mask and atlas to extract time series and connectomes for each subject.
    The time series data were denoised as follow:

    • Time series extractions through label or map maskers are performed on the denoised nifti file.
    • Denoising steps were performed on the voxel level:
      • spatial smoothing (FWHM: 5.0 mm)
      • detrending, only if high pass filter was not applied through confounds
      • regressing out confounds (using a simple strategy)
      • standardized (using zscore)
    • Extracted time series from atlas
    • Computed correlation matrix
  5. Calculate intranetwork correlation of each parcel. The values replace the diagonal of the connectomes.

  6. Create a group average connectome.

@Remi-Gau Remi-Gau marked this pull request as ready for review December 14, 2023 16:30
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 14, 2023

Codecov Report

Merging #77 (d2a4fad) into main (35e9756) will increase coverage by 0.31%.
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #77      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   91.31%   91.63%   +0.31%     
==========================================
  Files           9       10       +1     
  Lines         449      466      +17     
==========================================
+ Hits          410      427      +17     
  Misses         39       39              
Files Coverage Δ
giga_connectome/methods.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
giga_connectome/workflow.py 100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Probably worth checking with COBIDAS and the bids BEP for connectivity to see what else can go in there.

What are the typical things you would expect to see in a methods section @htwangtw ?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

  1. post processing details done on fMRIPrep output
  2. Atlas used
  3. Connectome calculation methods (most common one is pearson's correlation with LedoitWolf covariance estimator)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

For the atlas I can only have the name with have in the json files.
If those have more details then we could inject it in the methods. Probably worth waiting with the BIDS effort to standardize atlases to make a move there.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 for waiting on BIDS effort.
What you have here is more than sufficient comparing to what I have seen in papers

Copy link
Collaborator

@htwangtw htwangtw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thank you this is a nice addition

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 for waiting on BIDS effort.
What you have here is more than sufficient comparing to what I have seen in papers

@Remi-Gau Remi-Gau merged commit 22a4ae0 into bids-apps:main Jan 8, 2024
15 checks passed
@Remi-Gau Remi-Gau deleted the method branch January 8, 2024 17:10
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

automatically generate a method section
3 participants