ArticleHuman brain mapping2016
Between- and within-site variability of fMRI localizations.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2016. 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.
- Test-retest reliability of a finger-tapping fMRI task in a healthy population.The European journal of neuroscience · 2023Article
- Left DLPFC activity is associated with plasma kynurenine levels and can predict treatment response to escitalopram in major depressive disorder.Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2022Article
- Automatic identification of atypical clinical fMRI results.Neuroradiology · 2020Article
- Statistical harmonization corrects site effects in functional connectivity measurements from multi-site fMRI data.Human brain mapping · 2018Article
- From maps to models: A survey on the reliability of small studies of task-based fMRI.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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study provides first data about the spatial variability of fMRI sensorimotor localizations when investigating the same subjects at different fMRI sites. Results are comparable to a previous patient study. We found a median between-site variability of about 6 mm independent of task (motor or sensory) and experimental standardization (high or low). An intraclass correlation coefficient analysis using data quality measures indicated a major influence of the fMRI site on variability. In accordance with this, within-site localization variability was considerably lower (about 3 mm). We conclude that the fMRI site is a considerable confound for localization of brain activity. However, when performed by experienced clinical fMRI experts, brain pathology does not seem to have a relevant impact on the reliability of fMRI localizations. Hum Brain Mapp 37:2151-2160, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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.