Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26894279›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2016

Reliability of Task-Based fMRI for Preoperative Planning: A Test-Retest Study in Brain Tumor Patients and Healthy Controls.

Melanie A Morrison, Nathan W Churchill, Michael D Cusimano, Tom A Schweizer, Sunit Das, Simon J Graham

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed
–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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Increased task-relevant fMRI responsiveness in comatose cardiac arrest patients is associated with improved neurologic outcomes.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  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

6 authors.

Melanie A MorrisonPhysical Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Nathan W ChurchillKeenan Research Centre, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Michael D CusimanoKeenan Research Centre, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Tom A SchweizerKeenan Research Centre, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sunit DasKeenan Research Centre, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Simon J GrahamPhysical Sciences Platform, Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFunctional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) continues to develop as a clinical tool for patients with brain cancer, offering data that may directly influence surgical decisions. Unfortunately, routine integration of preoperative fMRI has been limited by concerns about reliability. Many pertinent studies have been undertaken involving healthy controls, but work involving brain tumor patients has been limited. To develop fMRI fully as a clinical tool, it will be critical to examine these reliability issues among patients with brain tumors. The present work is the first to extensively characterize differences in activation map quality between brain tumor patients and healthy controls, including the effects of tumor grade and the chosen behavioral testing paradigm on reliability outcomes.

methodTest-retest data were collected for a group of low-grade (n = 6) and high-grade glioma (n = 6) patients, and for matched healthy controls (n = 12), who performed motor and language tasks during a single fMRI session. Reliability was characterized by the spatial overlap and displacement of brain activity clusters, BOLD signal stability, and the laterality index. Significance testing was performed to assess differences in reliability between the patients and controls, and low-grade and high-grade patients; as well as between different fMRI testing paradigms.

resultsThere were few significant differences in fMRI reliability measures between patients and controls. Reliability was significantly lower when comparing high-grade tumor patients to controls, or to low-grade tumor patients. The motor task produced more reliable activation patterns than the language tasks, as did the rhyming task in comparison to the phonemic fluency task.

conclusionIn low-grade glioma patients, fMRI data are as reliable as healthy control subjects. For high-grade glioma patients, further investigation is required to determine the underlying causes of reduced reliability. To maximize reliability outcomes, testing paradigms should be carefully selected to generate robust activation patterns.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingPreoperative CareAdultAgedBrain NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesCohort StudiesFemaleGliomaHumansMaleMiddle AgedReproducibility of ResultsTask Performance and AnalysisYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID26894279
PMCPMC4760755

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.