Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28367446›Full record

SynthesisBioMed research international2017

Systematic Comparison of Brain Imaging Meta-Analyses of ToM with vPT.

Aditi Arora, Matthias Schurz, Josef Perner

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BioMed research international, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Visual Perspective Taking Training Improves Theory of Mind in Autistic Children.Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research · 2026
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. 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

3 authors.

Aditi AroraCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Hellbrunnerstr. 34, 5020 Salzburg, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7547-7757
Matthias SchurzCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Hellbrunnerstr. 34, 5020 Salzburg, Austria.
Josef PernerCentre for Cognitive Neuroscience, University of Salzburg, Hellbrunnerstr. 34, 5020 Salzburg, Austria.

Funding

Austrian Science Fund FWF W 1233
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In visual perspective taking (vPT) one has to concern oneself with what other people see and how they see it. Since seeing is a mental state, developmental studies have discussed vPT within the domain of "theory of mind (ToM)" but imaging studies have not treated it as such. Based on earlier results from several meta-analyses, we tested for the overlap of visual perspective taking studies with 6 different kinds of ToM studies: false belief, trait judgments, strategic games, social animations, mind in the eyes, and rational actions. Joint activation was observed between the vPT task and some kinds of ToM tasks in regions involving the left temporoparietal junction (TPJ), anterior precuneus, left middle occipital gyrus/extrastriate body area (EBA), and the left inferior frontal and precentral gyrus. Importantly, no overlap activation was found for the vPT tasks with the joint core of all six kinds of ToM tasks. This raises the important question of what the common denominator of all tasks that fall under the label of "theory of mind" is supposed to be if visual perspective taking is not one of them.

Indexed as

Theory of MindBrain MappingFrontal LobeHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeuroimagingOccipital LobeVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID28367446
PMCPMC5359439

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.