Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22493576›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroinformatics2012

Data sharing in neuroimaging research.

Jean-Baptiste Poline, Janis L Breeze, Satrajit Ghosh, Krzysztof Gorgolewski, Yaroslav O Halchenko, Michael Hanke, Christian Haselgrove, Karl G Helmer, David B Keator, Daniel S Marcus and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroinformatics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 147 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
147citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

147 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Representing Brain-Behavior Associations by Retaining High-Motion Minoritized Youth.Biological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Spectral normative modeling of brain structure.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Reporting checklists in neuroimaging: promoting transparency, replicability, and reproducibility.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  16. Current best practices and future opportunities for reproducible findings using large-scale neuroimaging in psychiatry.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

87 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

Jean-Baptiste PolineNeurospin, Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives Gif-sur-Yvette, France.
Janis L Breeze
Satrajit Ghosh
Krzysztof Gorgolewski
Yaroslav O Halchenko
Michael Hanke
Christian Haselgrove
Karl G Helmer
David B Keator
Daniel S Marcus
Russell A Poldrack
Yannick Schwartz
John Ashburner
David N Kennedy

Funding

TISSUE CULTURE CORE FACILITYP30HD004147 · NICHD · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI MCILVANE, WILLIAM J · 1985 to 2014
$9.1M
Exposing the Deep Content of the Publication: Knowledge Extraction for Neuroimaging in Child PsychiatryR01MH083320 · NIMH · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI FRAZIER, JEAN A, KENNEDY, DAVID NELSON · 2009 to 2020
$6.3M
NICHD NIH HHS P30 HD004147NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH083320Wellcome Trust 091593
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Significant resources around the world have been invested in neuroimaging studies of brain function and disease. Easier access to this large body of work should have profound impact on research in cognitive neuroscience and psychiatry, leading to advances in the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric and neurological disease. A trend toward increased sharing of neuroimaging data has emerged in recent years. Nevertheless, a number of barriers continue to impede momentum. Many researchers and institutions remain uncertain about how to share data or lack the tools and expertise to participate in data sharing. The use of electronic data capture (EDC) methods for neuroimaging greatly simplifies the task of data collection and has the potential to help standardize many aspects of data sharing. We review here the motivations for sharing neuroimaging data, the current data sharing landscape, and the sociological or technical barriers that still need to be addressed. The INCF Task Force on Neuroimaging Datasharing, in conjunction with several collaborative groups around the world, has started work on several tools to ease and eventually automate the practice of data sharing. It is hoped that such tools will allow researchers to easily share raw, processed, and derived neuroimaging data, with appropriate metadata and provenance records, and will improve the reproducibility of neuroimaging studies. By providing seamless integration of data sharing and analysis tools within a commodity research environment, the Task Force seeks to identify and minimize barriers to data sharing in the field of neuroimaging.

Indexed as

brain imagingdata sharingEEG-MEGfMRImagnetic resonance imagingstandards

Identifiers

PMID22493576
PMCPMC3319918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.