ArticleScientific reports2022
Improved correspondence of fMRI visual field localizer data after cortex-based macroanatomical alignment.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- A cortical surface template for human neuroscience.Nature methods · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Studying the visual system with fMRI often requires using localizer paradigms to define regions of interest (ROIs). However, the considerable interindividual variability of the cerebral cortex represents a crucial confound for group-level analyses. Cortex-based alignment (CBA) techniques reliably reduce interindividual macroanatomical variability. Yet, their utility has not been assessed for visual field localizer paradigms, which map specific parts of the visual field within retinotopically organized visual areas. We evaluated CBA for an attention-enhanced visual field localizer, mapping homologous parts of each visual quadrant in 50 participants. We compared CBA with volume-based alignment and a surface-based analysis, which did not include macroanatomical alignment. CBA led to the strongest increase in the probability of activation overlap (up to 86%). At the group level, CBA led to the most consistent increase in ROI size while preserving vertical ROI symmetry. Overall, our results indicate that in addition to the increased signal-to-noise ratio of a surface-based analysis, macroanatomical alignment considerably improves statistical power. These findings confirm and extend the utility of CBA for the study of the visual system in the context of group analyses. CBA should be particularly relevant when studying neuropsychiatric disorders with abnormally increased interindividual macroanatomical variability.
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.