In the context of the long resting state runs that we have available, I would argue that throwing in additional possible confounds is the appropriate thing to do. Are you suggesting that sex, age, age^2, sex*age, sex*age^2, brain size, head size, and average motion shouldn’t all be included?
Regardless, r = 0.21 (without confounds in the MegaTrawl) is a long way from the r = 0.5 prediction in Finn et al. Cheers, -MH -- Michael Harms, Ph.D. ----------------------------------------------------------- Conte Center for the Neuroscience of Mental Disorders Washington University School of Medicine Department of Psychiatry, Box 8134 660 South Euclid Ave. Tel: 314-747-6173 St. Louis, MO 63110 Email: mha...@wustl.edu From: <hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org> on behalf of Thomas Yeo <ytho...@csail.mit.edu> Date: Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 10:01 PM To: "Glasser, Matthew" <glass...@wustl.edu> Cc: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org" <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org> Subject: Re: [HCP-Users] netmats prediction of fluid intelligence Certainly one difference is that HCP (i.e., Steve) tends to take the more conservative approach of regressing a *lot* of potential confounds, which tends to result in a lower prediction values. You can see that without confound regression, Steve's prediction is 0.21 versus 0.06. Regards, Thomas On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 1:44 AM, Glasser, Matthew <glass...@wustl.edu<mailto:glass...@wustl.edu>> wrote: Perhaps there is an issue related to data clean up or alignment of brain areas across subjects. The Finn study does not appear to have followed the recommended approach to either. Peace, Matt. From: <hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users-boun...@humanconnectome.org>> on behalf of Benjamin Garzon <benjamin.gar...@ki.se<mailto:benjamin.gar...@ki.se>> Date: Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 1:39 PM To: "hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>" <hcp-users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:hcp-users@humanconnectome.org>> Subject: [HCP-Users] netmats prediction of fluid intelligence Dear HCP experts, I'm trying to reconcile the MegaTrawl prediction of fluid intelligence (PMAT24_A_CR) https://db.humanconnectome.org/megatrawl/3T_HCP820_MSMAll_d200_ts2/megatrawl_1/sm203/index.html (which shows r = 0.06 between predicted and measured scores) with the Finn 2015 study https://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v18/n11/full/nn.4135.html claiming an r = 0.5 correlation between predicted and measured scores. In the article they used a subset of the HCP data (126 subjects), but the measure of fluid intelligence is the same one. What can explain the considerable difference? As far as I can see the article did not address confounding, but even in that case r = 0.21 for MegaTrawl, which is still far from 0.5. And this considering that the model used in the article is a much simpler one than the MegaTrawl elastic net regressor. I've been trying to predict fluid intelligence in an independent sample with 300 subjects and a netmats + confounds model does not perform better than a confounds-only model, more in agreement with the MegaTrawl results. In the Smith 2015 paper http://www.nature.com/neuro/journal/v18/n11/full/nn.4125.html the found mode of covariation with the netmats data correlates with fluid intelligence with r = 0.38. Should I conclude from the Megatrawl analysis (as well as from my own) that the single measure of fluid intelligence is not reliable enough to be predicted based on connectome data, or am I missing something from the Finn paper? I would be happy to read people 's thoughts about this topic, in view of the disparate results in the literature. Best regards, Benjamín Garzón, PhD Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society Aging Research Center | 113<https://maps.google.com/?q=113%C2%A030+Stockholm+%7C+G%C3%A4vlegatan+16&entry=gmail&source=g> 30 Stockholm | Gävlegatan 16<https://maps.google.com/?q=113%C2%A030+Stockholm+%7C+G%C3%A4vlegatan+16&entry=gmail&source=g> benjamin.gar...@ki.se<mailto:benjamin.gar...@ki.se> | www.ki-su-arc.se<https://email.ki.se/owa/redir.aspx?C=LDNa9T7Nak68Br6ZyIC_J4KUwCiWMdEIQwVElfLYlCPLbdpUruOe0XhySwY-dNAYT9JyRT4AtFo.&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.ki-su-arc.se%2f> ______________________________________ Karolinska Institutet – a medical university _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org<mailto:HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org> http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users ________________________________ The materials in this message are private and may contain Protected Healthcare Information or other information of a sensitive nature. If you are not the intended recipient, be advised that any unauthorized use, disclosure, copying or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please immediately notify the sender via telephone or return mail. _______________________________________________ HCP-Users mailing list HCP-Users@humanconnectome.org http://lists.humanconnectome.org/mailman/listinfo/hcp-users
