Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31701088›Full record

ArticleNature machine intelligence2019

Towards Algorithmic Analytics for Large-scale Datasets.

Danilo Bzdok, Thomas E Nichols, Stephen M Smith

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nature machine intelligence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
–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

49 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Moving beyond 5-HTPsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  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

3 authors.

Danilo BzdokDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, RWTH Aachen University, 52072 Aachen, Germany.
Thomas E NicholsWellcome Trust Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging (WIN-FMRIB), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Stephen M SmithWellcome Trust Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging (WIN-FMRIB), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

Funding

Meta-anaylsis in human brain mappingR01MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2006 to 2024
$10.5M
Meta-analysis in human brain mappingR56MH074457 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI FOX, PETER THORNTON · 2020 to 2020
$543k
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH074457NIMH NIH HHS R56 MH074457Wellcome Trust 100309
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The traditional goals of quantitative analytics cherish simple, transparent models to generate explainable insights. Large-scale data acquisition, enabled for instance by brain scanning and genomic profiling with microarray-type techniques, has prompted a wave of statistical inventions and innovative applications. Modern analysis approaches 1) tame large variable arrays capitalizing on regularization and dimensionality-reduction strategies, 2) are increasingly backed up by empirical model validations rather than justified by mathematical proofs, 3) will compare against and build on open data and consortium repositories, as well as 4) often embrace more elaborate, less interpretable models in order to maximize prediction accuracy. Here we review these trends in learning from "big data" and illustrate examples from imaging neuroscience.

Indexed as

data sciencedeep phenotypingexplainable AImachine learningopen sciencereproducibility

Identifiers

PMID31701088
PMCPMC6837858

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.