ArticlePloS one2015
Using High Spatial Resolution to Improve BOLD fMRI Detection at 3T.
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 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- A neurofunctional signature of affective arousal generalizes across valence domains and distinguishes subjective experience from autonomic reactivity.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Unresponsiveness induced by sevoflurane and propofol is associated with reduced basal forebrain cholinergic nuclei functional connectivity in humans,Neuroimage. Reports · 2024Article
- A mesocorticolimbic signature of pleasure in the human brain.Nature human behaviour · 2023Article
- An isotropic EPI database and analytical pipelines for rat brain resting-state fMRI.NeuroImage · 2021Article
- The description-experience gap: a challenge for the neuroeconomics of decision-making under uncertainty.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Review
- A Novel Approach to Evaluate Brain Activation for Lower Extremity Motor Control.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2019Article
- Extended amygdala connectivity changes during sustained shock anticipation.Translational psychiatry · 2018Article
- Using fMRI to study reward processing in humans: past, present, and future.Journal of neurophysiology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For different functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments using blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) contrast, the acquisition of T2*-weighted scans at a high spatial resolution may be advantageous in terms of time-course signal-to-noise ratio and of BOLD sensitivity when the regions are prone to susceptibility artifacts. In this study, we explore this solution by examining how spatial resolution influences activations elicited when appetizing food pictures are viewed. Twenty subjects were imaged at 3 T with two different voxel volumes, 3.4 μl and 27 μl. Despite the diminution of brain coverage, we found that high-resolution acquisition led to a better detection of activations. Though known to suffer to different degrees from susceptibility artifacts, the activations detected by high spatial resolution were notably consistent with those reported in published activation likelihood estimation meta-analyses, corresponding to taste-responsive regions. Furthermore, these regions were found activated bilaterally, in contrast with previous findings. Both the reduction of partial volume effect, which improves BOLD contrast, and the mitigation of susceptibility artifact, which boosts the signal to noise ratio in certain regions, explained the better detection noted with high resolution. The present study provides further evidences that high spatial resolution is a valuable solution for human BOLD fMRI, especially for studying food-related stimuli.
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.