ArticleHuman brain mapping2021
Subject-specific segregation of functional territories based on deep phenotyping.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Individual Brain Charting: fifth release of high-resolution fMRI data for cognitive mapping.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Principles of intensive human neuroimaging.Trends in neurosciences · 2024Article
- Individual Brain Charting dataset extension, third release for movie watching and retinotopy data.Scientific data · 2024Article
- Should one go for individual- or group-level brain parcellations? A deep-phenotyping benchmark.Brain structure & function · 2024Article
- Predicting brain activation maps for arbitrary tasks with cognitive encoding models.NeuroImage · 2022Article
- Limits of decoding mental states with fMRI.Cortex; a journal devoted to the study of the nervous system and behavior · 2022Article
- Subject-specific segregation of functional territories based on deep phenotyping.Human brain mapping · 2021Article
- 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
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has opened the possibility to investigate how brain activity is modulated by behavior. Most studies so far are bound to one single task, in which functional responses to a handful of contrasts are analyzed and reported as a group average brain map. Contrariwise, recent data-collection efforts have started to target a systematic spatial representation of multiple mental functions. In this paper, we leverage the Individual Brain Charting (IBC) dataset-a high-resolution task-fMRI dataset acquired in a fixed environment-in order to study the feasibility of individual mapping. First, we verify that the IBC brain maps reproduce those obtained from previous, large-scale datasets using the same tasks. Second, we confirm that the elementary spatial components, inferred across all tasks, are consistently mapped within and, to a lesser extent, across participants. Third, we demonstrate the relevance of the topographic information of the individual contrast maps, showing that contrasts from one task can be predicted by contrasts from other tasks. At last, we showcase the benefit of contrast accumulation for the fine functional characterization of brain regions within a prespecified network. To this end, we analyze the cognitive profile of functional territories pertaining to the language network and prove that these profiles generalize across participants.
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.