Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31244595›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neuroscience2019

Spatial Resolution and Imaging Encoding fMRI Settings for Optimal Cortical and Subcortical Motor Somatotopy in the Human Brain.

Renaud Marquis, Sandrine Muller, Sara Lorio, Borja Rodriguez-Herreros, Lester Melie-Garcia, Ferath Kherif, Antoine Lutti, Bogdan Draganski

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neuroscience, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Subcortical contributions to the sense of body ownership.Brain : a journal of neurology · 2024
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Functional MRI in major depressive disorder: A review of findings, limitations, and future prospects.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging · 2022
    Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Renaud MarquisLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sandrine MullerLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Sara LorioLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Borja Rodriguez-HerrerosLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Lester Melie-GarciaLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Ferath KherifLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Antoine LuttiLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Bogdan DraganskiLaboratory for Research in Neuroimaging, LREN, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Lausanne University Hospital, CHUV, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
University of Lausanne · CHHarvard University · USUniversity College London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is much controversy about the optimal trade-off between blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) sensitivity and spatial precision in experiments on brain's topology properties using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). The sparse empirical evidence and regional specificity of these interactions pose a practical burden for the choice of imaging protocol parameters. Here, we test in a motor somatotopy experiment the impact of fMRI spatial resolution on differentiation between body part representations in cortex and subcortical structures. Motor somatotopy patterns were obtained in a block-design paradigm and visually cued movements of face, upper and lower limbs at 1.5, 2, and 3 mm spatial resolution. The degree of segregation of the body parts' spatial representations was estimated using a pattern component model. In cortical areas, we observed the same level of segregation between somatotopy maps across all three resolutions. In subcortical areas the degree of effective similarity between spatial representations was significantly impacted by the image resolution. The 1.5 mm 3D EPI and 3 mm 2D EPI protocols led to higher segregation between motor representations compared to the 2 mm 3D EPI protocol. This finding could not be attributed to differential BOLD sensitivity or delineation of functional areas alone and suggests a crucial role of the image encoding scheme - i.e., 2D vs. 3D EPI. Our study contributes to the field by providing empirical evidence about the impact of acquisition protocols for the delineation of somatotopic areas in cortical and sub-cortical brain regions.

Indexed as

BOLD sensitivityfunctional magnetic resonance imagingimage resolutionsegregationsubcortical areas

Identifiers

PMID31244595
PMCPMC6579882
OpenAlexW2952029412

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.