Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38499355›Full record

ArticleeNeuro2024

What

Joanes Grandjean, Evelyn M R Lake, Marco Pagani, Francesca Mandino

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eNeuro, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Joanes GrandjeanDonders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Nijmegen 6500HB, The Netherlands joanes.grandjean@radboudumc.nl francesca.mandino@yale.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8413-0491
Evelyn M R LakeDepartments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, Connecticut 06519.
Marco PaganiFunctional Neuroimaging Laboratory, Center for Neuroscience and Cognitive Systems, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, Rovereto 38068, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6052-6931
Francesca MandinoDepartments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging, New Haven, Connecticut 06519 joanes.grandjean@radboudumc.nl francesca.mandino@yale.edu.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5605-0854

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fueled by the recent and controversial brain-wide association studies in humans, the animal neuroimaging community has also begun questioning whether using larger sample sizes is necessary for ethical and effective scientific progress. In this opinion piece, we illustrate two opposing views on sample size extremes in MRI-based animal neuroimaging.

Indexed as

Magnetic Resonance ImagingNeuroimagingAnimalsBrainHumansanimal neuroimagingfMRIrodentsample size

Identifiers

PMID38499355
PMCPMC10950324

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.