Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32489141›Full record

SynthesisPsychological science2020

What Is the Test-Retest Reliability of Common Task-Functional MRI Measures? New Empirical Evidence and a Meta-Analysis.

Maxwell L Elliott, Annchen R Knodt, David Ireland, Meriwether L Morris, Richie Poulton, Sandhya Ramrakha, Maria L Sison, Terrie E Moffitt, Avshalom Caspi, Ahmad R Hariri

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Psychological science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 420 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
420citing papers in PubMed, 7 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

420 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. ΔBiological psychiatry. Cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging · 2026
    Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Article
  16. Resting-state functional connectivity of the default mode network as a predictor for escitalopram response in adolescents with depression.Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2026
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

360 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Maxwell L ElliottDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.ORCID 0000-0003-1083-6277
Annchen R KnodtDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.ORCID 0000-0003-0082-4600
David IrelandDunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Otago.
Meriwether L MorrisDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.
Richie PoultonDunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Otago.
Sandhya RamrakhaDunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Otago.
Maria L SisonDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.
Terrie E MoffittDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.
Avshalom CaspiDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.
Ahmad R HaririDepartment of Psychology & Neuroscience, Duke University.ORCID 0000-0003-3052-9880

Funding

Mapping the Human Connectome: Structure, Function, and HeritabilityU54MH091657 · NIMH · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI UGURBIL, KAMIL, VAN ESSEN, DAVID C · 2010 to 2014
$34.7M
Quantifying Individual Differences in Midlife Structural Brain Integrity Associated with Later AD/ADRD RiskR01AG049789 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI AHMAD R. HARIRI, TERRIE E MOFFITT · 2015 to 2026
$10.6M
Is mental disorder a preventable cause of age-related disease? The Dunedin Study.R01AG032282 · NIA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI CASPI, AVSHALOM, MOFFITT, TERRIE E · 2009 to 2025
$9.5M
Medical Research Council MR/P005918/1Medical Research Council P005918NIA NIH HHS R01 AG032282NIA NIH HHS R01 AG049789NIMH NIH HHS U54 MH091657
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Identifying brain biomarkers of disease risk is a growing priority in neuroscience. The ability to identify meaningful biomarkers is limited by measurement reliability; unreliable measures are unsuitable for predicting clinical outcomes. Measuring brain activity using task functional MRI (fMRI) is a major focus of biomarker development; however, the reliability of task fMRI has not been systematically evaluated. We present converging evidence demonstrating poor reliability of task-fMRI measures. First, a meta-analysis of 90 experiments (

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingBrainCognitionConnectomeHumansIndividualityReproducibility of Resultscognitive neuroscienceindividual differencesneuroimagingstatistical analysis

Identifiers

PMID32489141
PMCPMC7370246

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.