ArticlePloS one2015
Stroking or Buzzing? A Comparison of Somatosensory Touch Stimuli Using 7 Tesla fMRI.
Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Research Progress on Neural Processing of Hand and Forearm Tactile Sensation: A Review Based on fMRI Research.Neuropsychiatric disease and treatment · 2025Review
- Relation between palm and finger cortical representations in primary somatosensory cortex: A 7T fMRI study.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Article
- Single subject and group whole-brain fMRI mapping of male genital sensation at 7 Tesla.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Laminar CBV and BOLD response characteristics over time and space in the human primary somatosensory cortex at 7T.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studying body representations in the brain helps us to understand how we humans relate to our own bodies. The in vivo mapping of the somatosensory cortex, where these representations are found, is greatly facilitated by the high spatial resolution and high sensitivity to brain activation available at ultra-high field. In this study, the use of different stimulus types for somatotopic mapping of the digits at ultra-high field, specifically manual stroking and mechanical stimulation, was compared in terms of sensitivity and specificity of the brain responses. Larger positive responses in digit regions of interest were found for manual stroking than for mechanical stimulation, both in terms of average and maximum t-value and in terms of number of voxels with significant responses to the tactile stimulation. Responses to manual stroking were higher throughout the entire post-central sulcus, but the difference was especially large on its posterior wall, i.e. in Brodmann area 2. During mechanical stimulation, cross-digit responses were more negative than during manual stroking, possibly caused by a faster habituation to the stimulus. These differences indicate that manual stroking is a highly suitable stimulus for fast somatotopic mapping procedures, especially if Brodmann area 2 is of interest.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.