RevieweLife2023
Enhancing precision in human neuroscience.
Review in eLife, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Brain Association Studies in 2024: A Systematic Review of Sample Sizes and Preregistrations.Psychophysiology · 2026Pooled it
- Exploring EEG and ECG in Music Listening: A Scoping Review.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Selectivity for high-level language processing is highly localized in individual brains.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026Article
- Test-Retest Reliability of Sensorimotor Activity Measured With Spinal Cord fMRI.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Sustainable neuroscience through open science.Nature human behaviour · 2026Article
- From zero to lab: Guidelines and practical implementation for building a multimodal experimental psychology and cognitive neuroscience laboratory.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- How to Improve the Reliability of Aperiodic Parameter Estimates in M/EEG: A Method Comparison.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Practical guide to statistical reporting in optical imaging.Neurophotonics · 2026Article
- Intraindividual Variability Matters for the Correspondence Between Subjective Arousal, Valence, and Physiological Responses.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Increased synaptic turnover in injured cortical axons: exploring the role of SARM1 ablation.Frontiers in synaptic neuroscience · 2026Article
- Decoding the human brain during intelligence testing.Communications biology · 2025Article
- How to Improve the Reliability of Aperiodic Parameter Estimates in M/EEG: A Method Comparison and Recommendations for Best Practices.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Psychometric Considerations in Assessing Fear Generalization as a Predictor of Anxiety.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2025Article
- Look Fear in the Eyes: The Influence of Emotion Regulation on Spider Size Estimation-A Pupillometry Study.Psychophysiology · 2025Article
- Genome-wide analysis of brain age identifies 59 associated loci and unveils relationships with mental and physical health.Nature aging · 2025Article
- 7 tesla multiscale entropy analysis reveals increased resting-state complexity in key regions for fear and anxiety in spider-fearful individuals.NeuroImage · 2025Article
- High intensity exercise before sleep boosts memory encoding the next morning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Structural-functional brain network coupling during cognitive demand reveals intelligence-relevant communication strategies.Communications biology · 2025Article
- Serum BDNF Increase After 9-Month Contemplative Mental Training Is Associated With Decreased Cortisol Secretion and Increased Dentate Gyrus Volume: Evidence From a Randomized Clinical Trial.Biological psychiatry global open science · 2025Article
- No Evidence of Reliability Across 36 Variations of the Emotional Dot-Probe Task in 9,600 Participants.Clinical psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human neuroscience has always been pushing the boundary of what is measurable. During the last decade, concerns about statistical power and replicability - in science in general, but also specifically in human neuroscience - have fueled an extensive debate. One important insight from this discourse is the need for larger samples, which naturally increases statistical power. An alternative is to increase the precision of measurements, which is the focus of this review. This option is often overlooked, even though statistical power benefits from increasing precision as much as from increasing sample size. Nonetheless, precision has always been at the heart of good scientific practice in human neuroscience, with researchers relying on lab traditions or rules of thumb to ensure sufficient precision for their studies. In this review, we encourage a more systematic approach to precision. We start by introducing measurement precision and its importance for well-powered studies in human neuroscience. Then, determinants for precision in a range of neuroscientific methods (MRI, M/EEG, EDA, Eye-Tracking, and Endocrinology) are elaborated. We end by discussing how a more systematic evaluation of precision and the application of respective insights can lead to an increase in reproducibility in human neuroscience.
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.