ArticleFrontiers in psychology2021
An MRI Study on Effects of Math Education on Brain Development Using Multi-Instance Contrastive Learning.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper explores whether mathematical education has effects on brain development from the perspective of brain MRIs. While biochemical changes in the left middle front gyrus region of the brain have been investigated, we proposed to classify students by using MRIs from the intraparietal sulcus (IPS) region that was left untouched in the previous study. On the cropped IPS regions, the proposed model developed popular contrastive learning (CL) to solve the problem of multi-instance representation learning. The resulted data representations were then fed into a linear neural network to identify whether students were in the math group or the non-math group. Experiments were conducted on 123 adolescent students, including 72 math students and 51 non-math students. The proposed model achieved an accuracy of 90.24 % for student classification, gaining more than 5% improvements compared to the classical CL frame. Our study provides not only a multi-instance extension to CL and but also an MRI insight into the impact of mathematical studying on brain development.
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.