ArticleNeuroImage2019
Spatial confidence sets for raw effect size images.
Article in NeuroImage, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Highlight results, don't hide them: Enhance interpretation, reduce biases and improve reproducibility.NeuroImage · 2023Pooled it
- SPM-30 years and beyond.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2025Review
- Simultaneous confidence regions for image excursion sets: A validation study with applications in fMRI.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Semiparametric confidence sets for cross-sectional and longitudinal neuroimaging.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Inverse set estimation and inversion of simultaneous confidence intervals.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series C, Applied statistics · 2024Article
- Spatial confidence regions for combinations of excursion sets in image analysis.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B, Statistical methodology · 2024Article
- Functional magnetic resonance imaging of headache: Issues, best-practices, and new directions, a narrative review.Headache · 2023Review
- A Graph Convolutional Network Based on Univariate Neurodegeneration Biomarker for Alzheimer's Disease Diagnosis.IEEE journal of translational engineering in health and medicine · 2023Article
- Bayesian Inference for Brain Activity from Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Collected at Two Spatial Resolutions.The annals of applied statistics · 2022Article
- Functional delta residuals and applications to simultaneous confidence bands of moment based statistics.Journal of multivariate analysis · 2022Article
- Spatial Bayesian GLM on the cortical surface produces reliable task activations in individuals and groups.NeuroImage · 2022Article
- Brain-wide inferiority and equivalence tests in fMRI group analyses: Selected applications.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Combining transcranial magnetic stimulation with functional magnetic resonance imaging for probing and modulating neural circuits relevant to affective disorders.Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science · 2021Review
- Improving the replicability of neuroimaging findings by thresholding effect sizes instead of p-values.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Confidence Sets for Cohen's d effect size images.NeuroImage · 2021Article
- From maps to models: A survey on the reliability of small studies of task-based fMRI.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The mass-univariate approach for functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analysis remains a widely used statistical tool within neuroimaging. However, this method suffers from at least two fundamental limitations: First, with sufficient sample sizes there is high enough statistical power to reject the null hypothesis everywhere, making it difficult if not impossible to localize effects of interest. Second, with any sample size, when cluster-size inference is used a significant p-value only indicates that a cluster is larger than chance. Therefore, no notion of confidence is available to express the size or location of a cluster that could be expected with repeated sampling from the population. In this work, we address these issues by extending on a method proposed by Sommerfeld et al. (2018) (SSS) to develop spatial Confidence Sets (CSs) on clusters found in thresholded raw effect size maps. While hypothesis testing indicates where the null, i.e. a raw effect size of zero, can be rejected, the CSs give statements on the locations where raw effect sizes exceed, and fall short of, a non-zero threshold, providing both an upper and lower CS. While the method can be applied to any mass-univariate general linear model, we motivate the method in the context of blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) fMRI contrast maps for inference on percentage BOLD change raw effects. We propose several theoretical and practical implementation advancements to the original method formulated in SSS, delivering a procedure with superior performance in sample sizes as low as N=60. We validate the method with 3D Monte Carlo simulations that resemble fMRI data. Finally, we compute CSs for the Human Connectome Project working memory task contrast images, illustrating the brain regions that show a reliable %BOLD change for a given %BOLD threshold.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.