ArticleNeuroImage2020
Visual cortical regions show sufficient test-retest reliability while salience regions are unreliable during emotional face processing.
Article in NeuroImage, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of ibuprofen and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma on emotion-related neural activation: A randomized, placebo-controlled trial.Brain, behavior, and immunity · 2021Trial
- Large-Vessel Venous Signal Confounds Apparent Amygdala Activation in BOLD fMRI.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- The lateralized cerebellum: insights into motor, cognitive, and affective functioning across ages: a scoping review.Journal of neurology · 2025Article
- Opportunities and challenges in connectivity analysis for task-based fMRI comment on "connectivity analyses for task-based fMRI" by Huang S, De Brigard, F., Cabeza, R, and Davis, S.W.Physics of life reviews · 2024Article
- Topography of Emotions in Cerebellum as Appraised by Functional Imaging.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2022Article
- Test-retest reliability of fMRI during an emotion processing task: Investigating the impact of analytical approaches on ICC values.Frontiers in neuroimaging · 2022Article
- Basolateral and central amygdala orchestrate how we learn whom to trust.Communications biology · 2021Article
- Test-retest reliability of functional MRI food receipt, anticipated receipt, and picture tasks.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2021Article
- Test-retest reliability of approach-avoidance conflict decision-making during functional magnetic resonance imaging in healthy adults.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- Internal reliability of blame-related functional MRI measures in major depressive disorder.NeuroImage. Clinical · 2021Article
- Visual cortical regions show sufficient test-retest reliability while salience regions are unreliable during emotional face processing.NeuroImage · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Functional magnetic resonance imaging studies frequently use emotional face processing tasks to probe neural circuitry related to psychiatric disorders and treatments with an emphasis on regions within the salience network (e.g., amygdala). Findings across previous test-retest reliability studies of emotional face processing have shown high variability, potentially due to differences in data analytic approaches. The present study comprehensively examined the test-retest reliability of an emotional faces task utilizing multiple approaches to region of interest (ROI) analysis and by examining voxel-wise reliability across the entire brain for both neural activation and functional connectivity. Analyses included 42 healthy adult participants who completed an fMRI scan concurrent with an emotional faces task on two separate days with an average of 25.52 days between scans. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for the 'FACES-SHAPES' and 'FACES' (compared to implicit baseline) contrasts across the following: anatomical ROIs identified from a publicly available brain atlas (i.e., Brainnetome), functional ROIs consisting of 5-mm spheres centered on peak voxels from a publicly available meta-analytic database (i.e., Neurosynth), and whole-brain, voxel-wise analysis. Whole-brain, voxel-wise analyses of functional connectivity were also conducted using both anatomical and functional seed ROIs. While group-averaged neural activation maps were consistent across time, only one anatomical ROI and two functional ROIs showed good or excellent individual-level reliability for neural activation. The anatomical ROI was the right medioventral fusiform gyrus for the FACES contrast (ICC = 0.60). The functional ROIs were the left and the right fusiform face area (FFA) for both FACES-SHAPES and FACES (Left FFA ICCs = 0.69 & 0.79; Right FFA ICCs = 0.68 & 0.66). Poor reliability (ICCs < 0.4) was identified for almost all other anatomical and functional ROIs, with some exceptions showing fair reliability (ICCs = 0.4-0.59). Whole-brain voxel-wise analysis of neural activation identified voxels with good (ICCs = 0.6-0.74) to excellent reliability (ICCs > 0.75) that were primarily located in visual cortex, with several clusters in bilateral dorsal lateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC). Whole-brain voxel-wise analyses of functional connectivity for amygdala and fusiform gyrus identified very few voxels with good to excellent reliability using both anatomical and functional seed ROIs. Exceptions included clusters in right cerebellum and right DLPFC that showed reliable connectivity with left amygdala (ICCs > 0.6). In conclusion, results indicate that visual cortical regions demonstrate good reliability at the individual level for neural activation, but reliability is generally poor for salience regions often focused on within psychiatric research (e.g., amygdala). Given these findings, future clinical neuroimaging studies using emotional faces tasks to examine individual differences might instead focus on visual regions and their role in psychiatric disorders.
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.