Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30834431›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of clinical nutrition2019

Good practice in food-related neuroimaging.

Paul A M Smeets, Alain Dagher, Todd A Hare, Stephanie Kullmann, Laura N van der Laan, Russell A Poldrack, Hubert Preissl, Dana Small, Eric Stice, Maria G Veldhuizen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Reporting checklists in neuroimaging: promoting transparency, replicability, and reproducibility.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2024
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Nutritional metabolism and cerebral bioenergetics in Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2023
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

10 authors.

Paul A M SmeetsUMC Utrecht Brain Center, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, NL.
Alain DagherMontreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Todd A HareZurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Stephanie KullmannInstitute for Diabetes Research and Metabolic Diseases of the Helmholtz Center Munich at the University of Tübingen, German Center for Diabetes Research, Tübingen, Germany.
Laura N van der LaanAmsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Russell A PoldrackDepartment of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.
Hubert PreisslInstitute for Diabetes Research and Metabolic Diseases of the Helmholtz Center Munich at the University of Tübingen, German Center for Diabetes Research, Tübingen, Germany.
Dana SmallDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
Eric SticeOregon Research Institute, Eugene, OR.
Maria G VeldhuizenDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.

Funding

Cognitive and affective influences on taste processingR01DC006706 · NIDCD · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI SMALL, DANA M · 2006 to 2018
$5.3M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC006706
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The use of neuroimaging tools, especially functional magnetic resonance imaging, in nutritional research has increased substantially over the past 2 decades. Neuroimaging is a research tool with great potential impact on the field of nutrition, but to achieve that potential, appropriate use of techniques and interpretation of neuroimaging results is necessary. In this article, we present guidelines for good methodological practice in functional magnetic resonance imaging studies and flag specific limitations in the hope of helping researchers to make the most of neuroimaging tools and avoid potential pitfalls. We highlight specific considerations for food-related studies, such as how to adjust statistically for common confounders, like, for example, hunger state, menstrual phase, and BMI, as well as how to optimally match different types of food stimuli. Finally, we summarize current research needs and future directions, such as the use of prospective designs and more realistic paradigms for studying eating behavior.

Indexed as

Food AnalysisGuidelines as TopicMagnetic Resonance ImagingNeuroimagingaromadata sharingfood choicefood viewingfunctional magnetic resonance imaginggood practiceneuroimagingsatiationtaste

Identifiers

PMID30834431
PMCPMC7945961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.