ArticlePloS one2020
Implementation of clinically relevant and robust fMRI-based language lateralization: Choosing the laterality index calculation method.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- EEG-fMRI neurofeedback versus motor imagery after stroke, a randomized controlled trial.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Trial
- Distinct and shared neural resources between processing of dynamic physical objects and spatial working memory.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Hemispheric asymmetries in resting-state connectivity: insights from healthy controls and implications for neurological disorders.Brain structure & function · 2025Article
- Lateralized visuotopic organization in the macaque superior colliculus revealed by fMRI.Progress in neurobiology · 2025Article
- Unveiling the neuroplastic capacity of the bilingual brain: insights from healthy and pathological individuals.Brain structure & function · 2024Article
- Approaches to Measuring Language Lateralisation: An Exploratory Study Comparing Two fMRI Methods and Functional Transcranial Doppler Ultrasound.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Use of longitudinal functional MRI to demonstrate translocation of language function in patients with brain tumors.Journal of neurosurgery · 2023Article
- Beyond Broca's and Wernicke's: Functional Mapping of Ancillary Language Centers Prior to Brain Tumor Surgery.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2023Review
- Cerebral Hemodynamic Changes during Unaffected Handgrip Exercises in Stroke Patients: An fNIRS Study.Brain sciences · 2023Article
- Organizing Variables Affecting fMRI Estimates of Language Dominance in Patients with Brain Tumors.Brain sciences · 2021Review
- Developing fMRI protocol for clinical useNeurosciences (Riyadh, Saudi Arabia) · 2021Article
- Power spectral analysis can determine language laterality from resting-state functional MRI data in healthy controls.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of NeuroimagingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The assessment of language lateralization has become widely used when planning neurosurgery close to language areas, due to individual specificities and potential influence of brain pathology. Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) allows non-invasive and quantitative assessment of language lateralization for presurgical planning using a laterality index (LI). However, the conventional method is limited by the dependence of the LI on the chosen activation threshold. To overcome this limitation, different threshold-independent LI calculations have been reported. The purpose of this study was to propose a simplified approach to threshold-independent LI calculation and compare it with three previously reported methods on the same cohort of subjects. Fifteen healthy subjects, who performed picture naming, verb generation, and word fluency tasks, were scanned. LI values were calculated for all subjects using four methods, and considering either the whole hemisphere or an atlas-defined language area. For each method, the subjects were ranked according to the calculated LI values, and the obtained rankings were compared. All LI calculation methods agreed in differentiating strong from weak lateralization on both hemispheric and regional scales (Spearman's correlation coefficients 0.59-1.00). In general, a more lateralized activation was found in the language area than in the whole hemisphere. The new method is well suited for application in the clinical practice as it is simple to implement, fast, and robust. The good agreement between LI calculation methods suggests that the choice of method is not key. Nevertheless, it should be consistent to allow a relative comparison of language lateralization between subjects.
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.