ArticleJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism2021
Reproducibility of findings in modern PET neuroimaging: insight from the NRM2018 grand challenge.
Article in Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Building an open infrastructure for molecular neuroimaging: Standards and tools from the OpenNeuroPET initiative.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2026Review
- Building an open ecosystem for molecular neuroimaging: standards and tools from the OpenNeuroPET initiative.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Neurovascular and synaptic milieu of brain-resident cells in cognitive dysfunction of myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- A scoping review on metrics to quantify reproducibility: a multitude of questions leads to a multitude of metrics.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- Marital status and risk of cardiovascular disease - a multi-analyst study in epidemiology.European journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- One Question, Many Results—Why Epidemiological Studies Yield Heterogeneous Findings. Part 34 of a Series on Evaluation of Scientific Publications.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Review
- Neuroimaging Biomarkers in Addiction.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2024Article
- Reproducibility of arterial spin labeling cerebral blood flow image processing: A report of the ISMRM open science initiative for perfusion imaging (OSIPI) and the ASL MRI challenge.Magnetic resonance in medicine · 2024Article
- Subjective evidence evaluation survey for many-analysts studies.Royal Society open science · 2024Article
- Florbetapir PET-assessed demyelination is associated with faster tau accumulation in an APOE ε4-dependent manner.European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024Article
- Reproducible brain PET data analysis: easier said than done.Frontiers in neuroinformatics · 2024Article
- An automatic analysis framework for FDOPA PET neuroimaging.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2023Article
- PET-BIDS, an extension to the brain imaging data structure for positron emission tomography.Scientific data · 2022Article
- In Vivo Cerebral Translocator Protein (TSPO) Binding and Its Relationship with Blood Adiponectin Levels in Treatment-Naïve Young Adults with Major Depression: A [Biomedicines · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The reproducibility of findings is a compelling methodological problem that the neuroimaging community is facing these days. The lack of standardized pipelines for image processing, quantification and statistics plays a major role in the variability and interpretation of results, even when the same data are analysed. This problem is well-known in MRI studies, where the indisputable value of the method has been complicated by a number of studies that produce discrepant results. However, any research domain with complex data and flexible analytical procedures can experience a similar lack of reproducibility. In this paper we investigate this issue for brain PET imaging. During the 2018 NeuroReceptor Mapping conference, the brain PET community was challenged with a computational contest involving a simulated neurotransmitter release experiment. Fourteen international teams analysed the same imaging dataset, for which the ground-truth was known. Despite a plurality of methods, the solutions were consistent across participants, although not identical. These results should create awareness that the increased sharing of PET data alone will only be one component of enhancing confidence in neuroimaging results and that it will be important to complement this with full details of the analysis pipelines and procedures that have been used to quantify data.
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.