Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28879081›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage. Clinical2017

Validity and reliability of four language mapping paradigms.

Stephen M Wilson, Alexa Bautista, Melodie Yen, Stefanie Lauderdale, Dana K Eriksson

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage. Clinical, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 59 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
59citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

59 citing papers in PubMed, 103 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Right hemisphere language network plasticity in aphasia.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Right Hemisphere Language Network Plasticity in Aphasia.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  14. Article
  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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Stephen M WilsonDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Alexa BautistaDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Melodie YenDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Stefanie LauderdaleDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Dana K ErikssonDepartment of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
University of Arizona · US

Funding

Neural Correlates of Recovery from Aphasia After StrokeR01DC013270 · NIDCD · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER · PI Stephen M Wilson, Michael R de Riesthal · 2014 to 2026
$6.3M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC013270
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Language areas of the brain can be mapped in individual participants with functional MRI. We investigated the validity and reliability of four language mapping paradigms that may be appropriate for individuals with acquired aphasia: sentence completion, picture naming, naturalistic comprehension, and narrative comprehension. Five neurologically normal older adults were scanned on each of the four paradigms on four separate occasions. Validity was assessed in terms of whether activation patterns reflected the known typical organization of language regions, that is, lateralization to the left hemisphere, and involvement of the left inferior frontal gyrus and the left middle and/or superior temporal gyri. Reliability (test-retest reproducibility) was quantified in terms of the Dice coefficient of similarity, which measures overlap of activations across time points. We explored the impact of different absolute and relative voxelwise thresholds, a range of cluster size cutoffs, and limitation of analyses to a priori potential language regions. We found that the narrative comprehension and sentence completion paradigms offered the best balance of validity and reliability. However, even with optimal combinations of analysis parameters, there were many scans on which known features of typical language organization were not demonstrated, and test-retest reproducibility was only moderate for realistic parameter choices. These limitations in terms of validity and reliability may constitute significant limitations for many clinical or research applications that depend on identifying language regions in individual participants.

Indexed as

fMRILanguage mappingReliabilityTest-retest reproducibilityValidity

Identifiers

PMID28879081
PMCPMC5574842
OpenAlexW2325219905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.