Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22744798›Full record

ArticleNeuroradiology2012

Effectiveness of four different clinical fMRI paradigms for preoperative regional determination of language lateralization in patients with brain tumors.

Domenico Zacà, Joshua P Nickerson, Gerard Deib, Jay J Pillai

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neuroradiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 29 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Functional MRI Task Comparison for Language Mapping in Neurosurgical Patients.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2019
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors.

Domenico ZacàDivision of Neuroradiology, Russell H. Morgan Department of Radiology and Radiological Science, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine & The Johns Hopkins Hospital, 600 N. Wolfe Street, Phipps B-100, Baltimore, MD 21287, USA.
Joshua P Nickerson
Gerard Deib
Jay J Pillai

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionBlood oxygen level-dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has demonstrated its capability to provide comparable results to gold standard intracarotid sodium amobarbital (Wada) testing for preoperative determination of language hemispheric dominance. However, thus far, no consensus has been established regarding which fMRI paradigms are the most effective for the determination of hemispheric language lateralization in specific categories of patients and specific regions of interest (ROIs).

methodsForty-one brain tumor patients who performed four different language tasks-rhyming (R), silent word generation (SWG) sentence completion, and sentence listening comprehension (LC)-for presurgical language mapping by fMRI were included in this study. A statistical threshold-independent lateralization index (LI) was calculated and compared among the paradigms in four different ROIs for language activation: functional Broca's (BA) and Wernicke's areas (WA) as well as larger anatomically defined expressive (EA) and receptive (RA) areas.

resultsThe two expressive paradigms evaluated in this study are very good lateralizing tasks in expressive language areas; specifically, a significantly higher mean LI value was noted for SWG (0.36 ± 0.25) compared to LC (0.16 ± 0.24, p = 0.009) and for R (0.40 ± 0.22) compared to LC (0.16 ± 0.24, p = 0.001) in BA. SWG LI (0.28 ± 0.19) was higher than LC LI (0.12 ± 0.16, p = 0.01) also in EA. No significant differences in LI were found among these paradigms in WA or RA.

conclusionsSWG and R are sufficient for the determination of lateralization in expressive language areas, whereas new semantic or receptive paradigms need to be designed for an improved assessment of lateralization in receptive language areas.

Indexed as

Dominance, CerebralLanguageAdolescentAdultAgedAnalysis of VarianceBrain MappingBrain NeoplasmsFemaleFunctional LateralityHumansImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of Results

Identifiers

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.