Dear Chuyue
The PEB framework was introduced more recently than the RFX BMS approach. It is an alternative method - you wouldn't use both. In the SPM software, we generally recommend using PEB for group studies. An exception is when you want to compare models that have fundamentally different forms - e.g., different kinds of neural mass model - but that's unusual. For an introduction to DCM and PEB, please see the two-part NeuroImage tutorial paper at https://github.com/pzeidman/dcm-peb-example
Best
Peter
-----Original Message-----
From: SPM (Statistical Parametric Mapping) <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Chuyue Zhao
Sent: 07 August 2023 09:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [SPM] Model selection and 2nd level analysis of DCM for patients
⚠ Caution: External sender
Dear SPMers,
We want to use dynamic casual modeling to evaluate effective connectivity on glioma patients, but I’m really new to this. I read a guide paper (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.11.015) and it suggest that it is more suiteable to use RFX BMS for model selection. But I’m confused about the relationship between RFX BMS and PEB in the 2nd level DCM of SPM, is it suitable to use PEB framework to do the 2nd level analysis after RFX BMS or what is the proper way to do the 2nd Level of DCM after RFX BMS?
Best wishes,
Chuyue
|