Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31179609›Full record

Trial reportHuman brain mapping2019

Active head motion reduction in magnetic resonance imaging using tactile feedback.

Florian Krause, Caroline Benjamins, Judith Eck, Michael Lührs, Rick van Hoof, Rainer Goebel

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Human brain mapping, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A Rapid fMRI Paradigm for Localisation of the Language Network.The European journal of neuroscience · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Motivation and Pleasure Deficits Undermine the Benefits of Social Affiliation in Psychosis.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2024
    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

6 authors.

Florian KrauseDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2754-3692
Caroline BenjaminsDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Judith EckDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Michael LührsDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Rick van HoofDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Rainer GoebelDepartment of Cognitive Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Funding

European Commission's Seventh Framework Programme 602186Scannexus B.V.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Head motion is a common problem in clinical as well as empirical (functional) magnetic resonance imaging applications, as it can lead to severe artefacts that reduce image quality. The scanned individuals themselves, however, are often not aware of their head motion. The current study explored whether providing subjects with this information using tactile feedback would reduce their head motion and consequently improve image quality. In a single session that included six runs, 24 participants performed three different cognitive tasks: (a) passive viewing, (b) mental imagery, and (c) speeded responses. These tasks occurred in two different conditions: (a) with a strip of medical tape applied from one side of the magnetic resonance head coil, via the participant's forehead, to the other side, and (b) without the medical tape being applied. Results revealed that application of medical tape to the forehead of subjects to provide tactile feedback significantly reduced both translational as well as rotational head motion. While this effect did not differ between the three cognitive tasks, there was a negative quadratic relationship between head motion with and without feedback. That is, the more head motion a subject produced without feedback, the stronger the motion reduction given the feedback. In conclusion, the here tested method provides a simple and cost-efficient way to reduce subjects' head motion, and might be especially beneficial when extensive head motion is expected a priori.

Indexed as

ArtifactsFeedback, SensoryHead MovementsAdolescentFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMotionTouchYoung Adultartefactsmagnetic resonance imagingmotionneuroimaging

Identifiers

PMID31179609
PMCPMC6772179

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.